World of Ham Radio 1997/WOHR97_AmSoft_(1997-02-01).iso/usenets/1996_09/_antenna.txt

Text File | 1997-02-01 | 784KB | 18,504 lines

The World of Ham Radio CD-ROM


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:14:43 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sgi.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 1/2 wave vertical question
Date: 5 Sep 1996 02:47:35 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 23
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50lt27$[e-mail]>
References: <50lg60$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <50lg60$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (John Hill) writes:

>
>Why not simply place an RF line isolator on the coax where the 1/4 wave
>point occurs and choke off the current on the remainder of the feedline.
>No need for dinking around with sleeves. I've made some line isolators
>out of RG-142 wound through a stack of ferrite sleeves and sealed in
>pvc pipe with SO-239's on each end. They work great. So great, that
>I've sold them to local guys as fast as I could make them. Their good
>for keeping RF out of the shack, radiating feedlines, balancing dipole
>feeds, etc. If you want one, let me know. 73, John, NJ0M.

That won't be good for isolating the feedline in this case, John.

The isolator impedance would need to be *many* thousands of ohms, at least
20 or 30 thousand ohms to reduce common mode current by 90% or so. That's
quite a bit more than a feedline requires, and the voltage would be a few
thousand volts at modest power levels.

That's a great idea, and a nice product. I use similar unpackaged chokes
here on all my receiving antenna feedlines.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:14:44 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-ana-24.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!oleane!jussieu.fr!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.erols.net!nctuccca.edu.tw!voyager.iii.org.tw!news
From: "Hawk" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 52-69 MhzTwo frq car antenna?
Date: 3 Sep 1996 15:26:49 GMT
Organization: Gun
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <01bb99ac$d9092360$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shts.seed.net.tw
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

anyone can teach me desing  52-69Mhz two frq antenna or tell me How to find
way to sol!


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:14:45 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!nntp04.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Pete Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 80-m lazy vee parasitic array
Date: 2 Sep 96 21:33:58 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

I'm getting ready to put up a 4-element "lazy-vee" array for 80 meters,
along the lines of the K3LR 160-meter array in August 94 QST.

Modeling it with EZNEC, I have gotten some curious results, which I wonder
if anyone can shed some light on for me.

Basically the array works by leaving three of the four feeders floating
while the fourth is being driven.  The resulting open stubs at the center of
the three parasitics add inductive reactance, lengthening them electrically
and making them operate as reflectors.  The modeled performance is quite
attractive - ca. 4.5 dBi gain at around 21 degree elevation angle, and 15-25
dB F/B ratio, depending on frequency.

So here's my question -- the front-to-back ratio seems invariably better
(much better) above the resonant frequency of the driven element.  This is
the case regardless of compensating variations in the length of the
feedlines/stubs on the other three elements, even though I would think you
could approximate the change in the lengths of the reflectors by varying the
stubs, leaving the driven element the same.  Why?

I also notice that putting in real-world stub values in the model
(calculating the loading impedance that actually appears at the end of the
stub connected to the feedpoint) causes a fairly striking reduction in gain
as compared to the theoretical, lossless transmission line.  I suppose this
makes some intuitive sense but nevertheless it's a little surprising that an
87.5 foot length of RG-8X (x3, for sure) can cause so much loss at 3.5 mHz.

If all this is to be expected, does it suggest that I should leave the array
dipoles long for the operating frequency, inserting capacitance in series as
needed to cancel the positive reactance at the feedpoint (the resistive part
isn't too far off)?

Any advice appreciated!

73, Pete Smith N4ZR
[e-mail]
... and not changing!



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:14:46 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news1.erols.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!decwrl!news.PBI.net!ns2.mainstreet.net!sloth.swcp.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Brian Mileshosky, N5ZGT)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: ==> WANT: HyGain Tape Measure Antenna <==
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 04:02:45 GMT
Organization: Southwest Cyberport
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <50lj9f$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp136.swcp.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24000 rec.radio.swap:72261 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:32119

Hello Eveybody,
  I am looking for a HyGain tape measure dipole antenna.  This antenna
is actually two tape measure built into one piece, including the
feedpoint.  All you do is pull out the apporopriate amount of tape to
operate on your frequecny, and you are on the air!
  If you, or anybody you know, has one of these antennas for sale,
please E-Mail me as I am interested in taking it off your hands!
  Thank!
72/73,
Brian, N5ZGT


 _________________________________________________________________________
   Boy Scouts of America                 Amateur Radio - N5ZGT
    Eagle Scout - 1996            ARRL   QRP: NorCal# 1700   QRP-L# 580
     JASM - Troop 41           Author of Worldradio's "Youth Forum" Column
    Albuquerque, N.M.            Packet: N5ZGT @ KC5IZT.ALBQ.NM.USA.NA
  O.A. Lodge 66  <-W-W-W-<<             Internet: [e-mail]
 _________________________________________________________________________




From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:14:47 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!nntp.coast.net!oleane!jussieu.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!howland.erols.net!nntp.crl.com!usenet
From: Dennis Jacobson <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Alliance HD-73 parts
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 09:58:09 -0700
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: a105019.sfo5.as.crl.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)

Anyone out there know where I can get parts for the Alliance HD-73
rotator?  I don't find any listing for Alliance who I assume has sold
out to another company and was guessing that maybe CD bought them.

I can't confirm this and need to be pointed in the correct direction.

Thanks for any help....
--
       73... Dennis N6NG                     Retired:
       INTERNET: [e-mail]                Just another road kill on
       AX25: N6NG@KJ6FY.#NORCAL.CA.USA.NOAM  the Information Highway.


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:14:49 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!mr.net!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!news.physics.uiowa.edu!news.uiowa.edu!news
From: "William E. Sabin" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: Sun, 01 Sep 1996 01:51:46 -0700
Organization: none
Lines: 70
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <507b6o$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <50b2tv$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-116.cedar-rapids.lib.ia.us
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; U)

Roy Lewallen wrote:

> I maintain that current can't flow through the conductor. In
> fact, if it could (as you've said it can), there would have to be a field
> within the conductor (as you've said there is). The current-loop "theory"
> depends on this not being possible. So current cannot flow within or
> through the conductor while also flowing around the shield as I've
> described. The only way for the current on the inside of the shield to get
> to the outside is to flow to the end of the shield and around it. Not
> through it.
>
>

Do you believe that a 1/32 inch thickness of copper braid can support 100
volts, or even 1 millivolt between its two surfaces? That copper braid is
not an insulator between those two surfaces. And *declaring* it to be an
insulator, just to justify some concept, is weird science, at best. And
skin effect for a current flowing *along* its surface does *not* make it
an insulator for a voltage *between* its two surfaces. The center of that
braid is not made of plexiglass. Suggest you review the basic principles
that cause skin effect.

The current loop concept is false and deserves to die. It was brain-dead
the day it was born. Pull the plug and let it go.

> >4) An H field *can* exist inside and pass through the copper shield
> >material. Anyone who doesn't believe this simple and well-verified fact
> >needs to come to grips with it and learn to accept it. It is a fact. Only
> >a current in the right direction and of the right magnitude and phase can
> >cancel the H field inside the shield.
>
> Among the people who don't believe this "fact" are the authors of the three
> textbooks I quoted. You haven't made a convincing argument that either they
> or I should have reason to "learn to accept it".

You have not properly understood your references.

I have quoted (several times) a very reliable reference who says it can
be done. Any edition of Kraus "Electromagnetics". I have very carefully
stated the conditions, repeatedly, under which it is true. I am talking
about the boundary relations for a purely and strictly *tangential*
magnetic field. The coax cable geometry meets this condition. If there is
NO OPPOSING CURRENT (OR AN INADEQUATE OPPOSING CURRENT) in the
"conducting material" it "qualifies" in a special sense as a
"non-conductor" and if the permeability is not very large the H field
will penetrate. It is not enough for the material to be a "conducting
material", it has to be actually conducting current. And you have stated
that the center lead current "induces" a current in the shield. This is
not true. It induces an emf. A current flow may, or may not, depending on
the load impedance for that emf.


> A post of quotes of a paragraph
> or so from some of your references stating that a time-varying field can
> exist within a perfect conductor would be much more convincing to me.


An electric field can exist on the surface of a perfect conductor by
virtue of its inductance. I was told repeatedly and emphatically by one
correspondent that this is not true. Baloney! It is true and anyone with
a novice ticket knows it is true.

I am being told that a magnetic flux cannot possibly pass through a thin
layer of copper, even if there is no current flow in the conductor.
Baloney!

I am being told that 1/32 inch thickness of copper braid can act as an
insulator for a voltage difference between its two surfaces. Baloney!

Bill W0IYH


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:14:50 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!oleane!jussieu.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!howland.erols.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: 2 Sep 1996 19:45:20 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 45
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50frig$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Repost of my reply. Apparently it isn't going to make it.......

Jack wrote:
>
>Now, if this is true, I would like to know how a 1/4 wave
>stub, connected between the center conductor (at the load) and
>the shield (1/4 wave below the load) can force balance.  Such
>a device does absolutely nothing to prevent fields from
>penetrating the shield of the coax.  In addition, because
>it is not even connected to the shield until a point 1/4 wave
>below the antenna, fields should remain free to escape through
>the shield over that entire length.
>
>Please, can someone on the other side of this argument tell
>me how such a device contains those pesky fields?
>
>73,
>Jack  WB3U

Hi Jack,

Like my pappy said.......

Common mode currents flow on the outside of the line. The 1/4 wave line
tied to the center conductor side of the dipole presents opposite phase
excitation to the second conductor of a two wire line. This cancels
radiation from the shield.

The conductors are tied together at the low impedance point in the
electrical center of the stub, so the remainder of the line is not
(hopefully) excited. Much like tying the shield to the center of a
plumber's delight element.

Differential mode currents are confined to the inside of the line, and are
not "disturbed" by the common mode stub.

I don't see much wrong with looking at it the problem this way, do you?

Don't get me wrong, I understand the other model and it is correct from a
physics view. But I'm a simple person with a simple mind. I like to use
the simpliest model that works (Cheryl Teigs comes to mind, rather than
one with a safety pin in her nose).
I like to feel completely comfortable with a model. :-)

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:14:51 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-12.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-22.sprintlink.net!tezcat!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: 3 Sep 1996 12:56:32 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 26
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50ho00$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <[e-mail]>, "William E. Sabin"
<[e-mail]> writes:

>>
>> Because the shield is continuous, it is (in effect) a series
>> of many shorted turns, all stacked together on a common axis.
>>
>> 73,
>> Jack  WB3U
>
>This I agree with, Jack. Terman describes it that way.
>
>Bill

Bill,

As I said before, your viewpoint "works" in every case I can think
of...and so will the other one (although more complex).

Being the simple minded person I am, I prefer the simplest model that
works to solve a problem. If I had to worry about sleeve or shield losses,
I'd worry about using whichever model is physically correct. If anyone can
point out any other possible error caused by treating the structure in a
more simple manner, I'd appreciate hearing it.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:14:52 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!fozzie.mercury.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!news.infi.net!imci5!pull-feed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: 3 Sep 1996 12:22:01 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 36
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50hlv9$[e-mail]>
References: <50cdvd$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <50cdvd$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>
>So how is it that no one can explain how a ferrite bead
>balun prevents current leakage through the supposedly
>ineffectual shield at locations on the line that are not
>covered by the beads?  Or how a 1/4 wave stub at the load,
>which doesn't shield the cable at all, can prevent the
>fields from penetrating the shield, thus forcing equal
>currents on the inner conductors?
>
>

The bead effect can simply be explained by the high common mode impedance
Jack, and the transformer action. Remember the big thread about moving the
balun to the input of the tuner, when I said it would make no difference?
Current flow over around or through the conductor makes no difference in
proving one of these explainations correct.

I explained the 1/4 wl stub also, but this server is slow so it may not
have showed up yet. It simply conducts and equal and opposite current that
cancels radiation, and gives the antenna an equal common mode load placing
it in balance. The beads work with any amount of antenna asymmetry, the
1/4 stub will NOT. It requires a perfectly balanced antenna to be
effective.

The only *real world* effect we can actually "see" between the two
explainations is heating of the shield. If current loops around an
electrically short shield at least several cable diameters long, the
shield will get twice as hot when floated as when depended on to carry
return load current.

I wonder if anyone else can think of a real world difference?

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:14:53 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-5.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!news.cdsnet.net!news.magicnet.net!news.goodnet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.compuserve.com!news.production.compuserve.com!news
From: Tom Rauch <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: 3 Sep 1996 18:22:06 GMT
Organization: CompuServe, Inc. (1-800-689-0736)
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <50ht0e$f6l$[e-mail]>
References: <501ls7$[e-mail]>

Speed test pardon me trying new service

--
Tom W8JI


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:14:54 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.fast.net!netaxs.com!tezcat!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz.cv.hp.com!tomb
From: [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: 3 Sep 1996 21:16:30 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard Corvallis Site
Lines: 68
Message-ID: <50i77e$[e-mail]>
References: <50hrtd$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hplsnb.lsid.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL9.4]

[e-mail] wrote:
: William E. Sabin ([e-mail]) wrote:

: :Let's take a small, lossless powdered iron toroid and wind an RF
: :transformer, say at 10 MHz, using a "perfectly conducting material". If
: :we connect an RF voltmeter across the open-circuit secondary we will
: :measure an open-circuit voltage. This is common sense that we are all
: :familiar with.

: It's also what the math says. You need to set the electric field in the
: wire to zero to get this result. Try performing the experiment with the
: secondary made of nylon instead of copper (why do you need a conductor
: when you say there isn't any motion of the electrons?) Common sense
: says that when you hang the voltmeter out in the middle of nowhere,
: that there is no reading. That's because the E field is around the
: primary and not across your voltmeter. You need the conductor to set
: the E field to zero along its path to put an E field across the
: voltmeter. That's what the math says. That's what we measure.
: No extra rules are required.

For those of us who are following this rather casually, perhaps it would
be good to state Faraday's law of electromagnetic induction in some
reasonably comprehensible way.  I believe that something like

    Around a closed line (loop of any shape) enclosing a changing
    magnetic flux, an electromotive force proportional to the rate
    of change of magnetic flux will be induced.

should do the trick.

This emf will be independent of any material in the path, and in
particular exists whether there is a conductor there or not.  If a
conductor exists for _most_ of the path, save a short gap, as Kevin
says, the conductor concentrates the emf at the gap.  If you put a load
resistance across the gap so that current flows, then there is a drop
along the conductor according to its resistance, but the total emf
around the loop remains constant.  NOTE ESPECIALLY that this violates
Kirchoff's voltage law, very explicitly.  The sum of voltage around a
loop is NOT zero--it's zero only if there is no net changing magnetic
flux enclosed by that loop.  Back to the loop in the changing field, if
it's a symmetrical loop made of uniform wire crosssection and
resistivity, and the field is uniform, I would expect simply by symmetry
that the emf is distributed uniformly over the length of the wire.  But
clearly not if there is a gap in the loop.

It seems to me that in a similar way, if a piece of line is driving a
matched load, say 50 ohms with 50 volt peak signal, and the line is
half a wavelength long, when there is a voltage peak at the generator
there is about 100 volts difference from the input to the output ends
of the line.  You can say that emf is all along a center conductor or
all along an outer conductor, or divided between them, but it's for sure
there.  But if you measure with a voltmeter along the outside of
the outer conductor, you will find there is only a drop because of
line current times conductor (RF) resistance, which will be far less
than even half the 100 volts we are looking for.  You can make that
measurement with reasonable accuracy because of the lack of magnetic
field (RF at the generator's frequency) outside the line.  Similarly, if
the center conductor itself was a piece of tubing you could put a wire
down it, connect it at the "far" end to the tube, and measure the drop
from wire to inner-coax-conductor-tube at the "near" end, and it would be
close to zero.  In fact, if you looked at the phase of those two voltage
drops relative to the phase of the generator and load voltages, you might
learn some interesting things from that.

--
Cheers,
Tom
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:14:55 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsreader.sprintlink.net!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!news.physics.uiowa.edu!news.uiowa.edu!news
From: "William E. Sabin" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re:BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 13:53:28 -0700
Organization: none
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-114.cedar-rapids.lib.ia.us
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; U)

Something very simple and obvious has finally dawned on me. Despite my
desire to bail out, I want to share it with you.

The main sticking point in our discussions has been the equation

    J = E * sigma

If sigma is infinite (perfect conductor) then E must be zero, or else J
becomes infinite. A dilemma.

The problem is that this equation is what Kraus calls a "circuit
relation". In order to get the true picture we must consider the *entire*
circuit, not just one part of it.

Example: consider a transformer whose secondary has a certain value of E.
The wire in the secondary has sigma(1). Connected across the secondary is
a load resistor which has sigma(2).

The relationship for the entire series circuit is:

      J = E * (sigma(1) * sigma(2))/(sigma(1) + sigma(2))

That is, we consider the transformer winding connected to a load resistor
and we go around the complete series circuit from the bottom of the
winding back to the same point.

We now have the true picture. If sigma(1) = Infinity the equation reduces
to

      J = E * sigma(2)

and we see immediately that a finite E can exist on the surface of a
perfect conductor if sigma(2) is not infinite (a short circuit).

And if sigma(2) = zero (open circuit) then

     J = E * 0 = 0

for any value of sigma(1), including infinity.

The significance of this is that E, the electric field in the wire of the
transformer, can now be greater than zero along the wire, even if it is a
perfect conductor, as long as sigma(1) and sigma(2) are not both
infinite.

This coincides with our real-world, common-sense understanding and
experience with circuits and also with our understanding of what a "short
circuit" is.

We see also that the original equation corresponds to a short circuit, in
which case E must be zero if sigma(1) is infinite.

In the situations that we have been discussing, sigma(2) is not infinite.

Bill W0IYH


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:14:58 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.inet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-10.sprintlink.net!tezcat!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: 4 Sep 1996 09:33:51 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 31
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50k0fv$[e-mail]>
References: <50irhu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <50irhu$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Roy
Lewallen) writes:

>
>Each to his own. But I steer clear of any model that's fundamentally
>flawed. Sooner or later, it trips you up, predicting results that don't
>happen. I suppose that the aether theory was easy to apply and -- almost
>always -- predicted the right results. Given my choice, I'll take the
>theory that's fundamentally correct, and learn to understand it.
>
>

My worry isn't application of this by you Roy, it's the layman trying to
fit this model into basic understandings of how a transmission line
behaves. Sometimes it's better to bite one's tounge a bit rather than
confuse people.

For example, a "wave" really does not leave my HF antenna and bounce off
the ionosphere and arrive at the receiver. The picture is wrong, but
results fit what we "know happens".

Misuse and abuse of displacement "current" allows people to "invent"
lossless verticals, look what it to to a nice guy that eventually
suggested insulated radials on the roof of a car on a VHF antenna would be
more efficient.

The list goes on, but I think a more complex explaination sometimes isn't
always best unless those using it have an absolutely complete grasp of
what it really means. It's the effects that really matter in the end.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:14:59 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.netone.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-12.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 08:51:52 -0700
Organization: Intel Corp., Chandler, AZ
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <50hsb2$[e-mail]> <50ie20$[e-mail]> <50irhu$[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 2.01 (Win16; I)

Roy Lewallen wrote:
> I suppose that the aether theory was easy to apply and -- almost
> always -- predicted the right results. Given my choice, I'll take the
> theory that's fundamentally correct, and learn to understand it.

Good news, Roy, Stephen Hawking has theorized that there really is a
quantum aether that fills all of known space. EM waves probably need
that very quantum aether through which to propagate.

73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:02 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.bctel.net!news.mag-net.com!ve7tcp.ampr.org!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: 5 Sep 96 04:04:20 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 61
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]


Roy Lewallen, W7EL asked the question:

   If we connect a wire between the otherwise open-circuited ends of a
   coax shield, does this create a "shorted turn" and permit current to
   flow inside or outside the shield?

I 'assume' that there is a normal or perfect load on the center
conductor, permitting normal current flow, not a true open circuit such
as when the dikes cut the coax off clean.  For arguments sake, let's
use a high skin current generator like a long wire for a load.  I have
used a long wire attached to the center conductor of a coax, with
ferrite beads on the outside of the shield to prevent coax radiation
into the building.  I did not attach the shield to anything, just left
it cut off clean.  The antenna worked great, and I removed the rf from
the building!

From the given description, I would be of the opinion that there would
be normal flow on the inside of the coax, and on the outside of the
coax, in the same amount as before the wire is installed.

However, the path for the current flow has changed.  Originally, the
inside shield current returned down from the load parallel to the center
conductor, at a fixed distance.  In a real, physical sense, if the wire
is connected between the shield and center conductor dielectric space,
an impedance bump is created.  So, I'll leave the inside alone as much
as possible.  Running the wire inside the coax shield, and spreading the
coax shield to maintain the same dielectric distance, The wire will
appear as a loop, curving back along, and attaching to, the outer
shield at a distance from the end of the shield.  Attaching more and
more loops around the shield starts to give a toroid appearance as the
gaps get closer and eventually join to form a solid donut shape.  Since
the material is non-magnetic, counter-emf is not a critical factor, as
it is in a ferrite choke.  The skin effect current now detours through
the new conductive outer path, and rejoins the former outer current at
the attachment point. Little change in the amount of current will occur,
compared to the original, unmodified shield.  Only the conductor
thickness has changed, as it would going from a small gauge wire to a
larger gauge, and back to the smaller gauge.



I have a follow-up question along these lines.  If I insert a ferrite
choke on the end of the coax, and reserve enough of the coax shield to
fold it back over itself and the ferrite choke, and reattach it as
above, will the choke be effective? (Looks like a ravioli)

From earlier postings, there is a conflicting argument as to whether
there is current flow inside a conductor, or does it only flow on the
skin.  If it truely only flows on the skin, then the back emf will
not be developed, since the choke would then be located between the
inner current flow and the outer current flow.

The next logical question is this:  If an rf conducting wire is slit
open, and a ferrite center is inserted, and then closed, will emf be
developed by the ferrous material?  The closest real item that occurs to
me is copper-clad wire.


73B4U81
Tom Stone/ex


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:02 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news3.near.net!amber.ora.com!newsie.dmc.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Tom Sefranek)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 14:12:21 GMT
Organization: cmcorp.com
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <50mnbu$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: tcs.cmcorp.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] wrote:


>  I have
>used a long wire attached to the center conductor of a coax, with
>ferrite beads on the outside of the shield to prevent coax radiation
>into the building.  I did not attach the shield to anything, just left
>it cut off clean.  The antenna worked great, and I removed the rf from
>the building!

What does "worked great" mean?   Compared to dummy load?

From the description, I hazzard a guess that it could have been
"greater".

Where were the beads?   What quantity, what material?

This sounds like smoke and mirrors!

Respectfully submitted,
Tom
WA1RHP




From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:04 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!news.etcfiber.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sgi.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: 5 Sep 1996 08:23:22 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 39
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50mgnq$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Experiment results, this $%#@! AOL crap ate my last messages so this a
crude repost.

I used a three ft square copper groundplane witha SO-239 at one corner. A
50 ohm series resistor went to 1/2 inch copper foil that nagled up to the
top of a 10 inch high vertical wire at the center of the groundplane. 2
MHz test freq.

Away from the feed direction I installed an 11 inch tall 5 inch wide
shield of .050 copper. Using a Harris PRD 2020-S4 with a 1/2 inch diameter
3 turn pancake H field probe I measured:

Reference point 1/2 inch from vertical wire -5 dB (40 mV) equal in all
directions and all along the wire except within 1/2 inch of the ends,
where the H field changed directions and got a bit weaker. I could not
measure on shield side of course because the probe was too big.

On the shield, -20 dB at the exact center (that was closest to the
wire...about .060 inch away but on the other side of the shield). 1/4 inch
in from the vertical edges -14 dB, this was the highest current point.

Near the top the highest current area current bent out towards the sides,
it was -17 dB 1/2 inch below the top and at around  30 degree angle. At
the top it was -20 dB and at a preetty good angle, about 45 deg.

E field was referenced 5 inches above the GP. 1/2 inch from the wire was
set at zero dB. The E field tracked the H field pattern almost perfectly
(certainly within error tolerances) being about -9 dB at the high current
areas and  -15 in the middle.

There was no change in ratios of fields at the measurement points, only
distortion of the fields by the shield. Two feet away the shield made no
difference when  installed or removed. It didn't affect the E field or the
H field.

So much for shielding those small receiving antennas with a Faraday
shield, eh?

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:06 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!munnari.OZ.AU!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: 5 Sep 96 22:29:30 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 64
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

My previous entry was split somehow.  Next time,
I tune antennas, not a new program!  Here is the
complete message:

Roy Lewallen, W7EL asked the question:

   If we connect a wire between the otherwise open-circuited ends of a
   coax shield, does this create a "shorted turn" and permit current to
   flow inside or outside the shield?

I 'assume' that there is a normal or perfect load on the center
conductor, permitting normal current flow, not a true open circuit such
as when the dikes cut the coax off clean.  For arguments sake, let's
use a high skin current generator like a long wire for a load.  I have
used a long wire attached to the center conductor of a coax, with
ferrite beads on the outside of the shield to prevent coax radiation
into the building.  I did not attach the shield to anything, just left
it cut off clean.  The antenna worked great, and I removed the rf from
the building!

From the given description, I would be of the opinion that there would
be normal flow on the inside of the coax, and on the outside of the
coax, in the same amount as before the wire is installed.

However, the path for the current flow has changed.  Originally, the
inside shield current returned down from the load parallel to the center
conductor, at a fixed distance.  In a real, physical sense, if the wire
is connected between the shield and center conductor dielectric space,
an impedance bump is created.  So, I'll leave the inside alone as much
as possible.  Running the wire inside the coax shield, and spreading the
coax shield to maintain the same dielectric distance, The wire will
appear as a loop, curving back along, and attaching to, the outer
shield at a distance from the end of the shield.  Attaching more and
more loops around the shield starts to give a toroid appearance as the
gaps get closer and eventually join to form a solid donut shape.  Since
the material is non-magnetic, counter-emf is not a critical factor, as
it is in a ferrite choke.  The skin effect current now detours through
the new conductive outer path, and rejoins the former outer current at
the attachment point. Little change in the amount of current will occur,
compared to the original, unmodified shield.  Only the conductor
thickness has changed, as it would going from a small gauge wire to a
larger gauge, and back to the smaller gauge.



I have a follow-up question along these lines.  If I insert a ferrite
choke on the end of the coax, and reserve enough of the coax shield to
fold it back over itself and the ferrite choke, and reattach it as
above, will the choke be effective? (Looks like a ravioli)

From earlier postings, there is a conflicting argument as to whether
there is current flow inside a conductor, or does it only flow on the
skin.  If it truely only flows on the skin, then the back emf will
not be developed, since the choke would then be located between the
inner current flow and the outer current flow.

The next logical question is this:  If an rf conducting wire is slit
open, and a ferrite center is inserted, and then closed, will emf be
developed by the ferrous material?  The closest real item that occurs to
me is copper-clad wire.


73B4U81
Tom Stone


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:07 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!nntp.coast.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!news.acsu.buffalo.edu!news.drenet.dnd.ca!crc-news.doc.ca!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!dg198
From: [e-mail] (Frank Sved)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best antenna for 80m at home?
Date: 4 Sep 1996 11:28:42 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 30
Sender: [e-mail] (Frank Sved)
Message-ID: <50jp5a$[e-mail]>
References: <5045qb$[e-mail]> <507mkp$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Frank Sved)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca


 ([e-mail]) writes:


 ====== snip ======
> As you either acclimatize to the low bands, or don't, you
won't have spent
> hard earned money foolishly, should you not like the noise on and hard work
> of 80 and 40.  You will have a lot of fun, your way, with what you couldn't
> possibly known you would have liked, before you tried simple antennae on the

> other bands as well.
>
> Mike @ W5WQN
>
>
 Thanks Mike!  Great reply.  I will go with a long wire, however, someone
told me to setup a G5RV.  Apparently I will get better performance that
dipole.

I have a quick question, though, about the G5RV.  I can get my hands on
some 450 Ohm ladder line (twin).  Is that ok?  The only plan I have for a
G5RV is the ARRL Antenna book and they suggest 75 Ohm.  Is this true?

Thanks.


--


  Bye for now, Frank Sved (VE3GID) at [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:08 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.erols.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sgi.com!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best antenna for 80m at home?
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 12:18:24 -0700
Organization: Intel Corp., Chandler, AZ
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <5045qb$[e-mail]> <507mkp$[e-mail]> <50jp5a$[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 2.01 (Win16; I)

Frank Sved wrote:
> I have a quick question, though, about the G5RV.  I can get my hands on
> some 450 Ohm ladder line (twin).  Is that ok?  The only plan I have for a
> G5RV is the ARRL Antenna book and they suggest 75 Ohm.  Is this true?

Hi Frank, the G5RV is designed for 20m and the twinlead section is 1/2WL
on 20m, so *for 20m* it doesn't matter what the twinlead impedance is since
the antenna impedance will be reproduced at the twinlead/coax junction.
However, that twinlead impedance has an effect on the other bands. For
instance, EZNEC says that the twinlead section should be 32ft for 450
ohm ladder-line to resonate on 14.2MHz. That gives an SWR on the coax of 40:1
on 75m and 7:1 on 40m, according to EZNEC. I suggest you use the 450ohm
ladder-line all the way to a balanced antenna tuner at the transmitter.
Why not go for the most efficient possible wire antenna?

For a G5RV to perform as well as a 75m resonant dipole, matching should be
done on the twinlead section. A 1.3uH coil at 17.5ft for 450ohm ladder-line
and at 21.3ft for 300ohm ladder-line will result in close to 50ohms on 3.8MHz
according to EZNEC.

73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:10 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news-in.tiac.net!sunfish.hi.com!brainiac.hi.com!user
From: [e-mail] (Steve Byan)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Beverage Antennas
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 14:47:09 -0400
Organization: Hitachi Computer Products, Inc.
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: brainiac.hi.com

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

> I'm looking for a good book on lowband Beverage antennas. Anyone have
> any suggestions?

The second edition  of Devoldere's "Low Band DXing", available from the
ARRL, is a very good start.

Regards,
-Steve

--
Steve Byan                                  internet: [e-mail]
Hitachi Computer Products (America), Inc.
1601 Trapelo Road                           phone: [phone]
Waltham, MA 02154                           FAX: [phone]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:11 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: beverage matching?
Date: 2 Sep 1996 19:45:31 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 25
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50frir$[e-mail]>
References: <50dohs$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <50dohs$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (bob puharic)
writes:

>
>Much has been written about proper impedance matching for beverages to
>ensure that the all the received signal is fed to the rx. However, one
>question: is this necessary? Since HF is inherently noisy, and we need
>to maximize S/N ratio,  does matching do any good? if the signal is
>low qrn, then S/N will be high. if qrn is high, then matching will
>just feed high qrn to the rx....comments?
>
>

That's right. One S/N ratio is established in the antenna, and not in the
receiver noise, matching is a waste of time.

One reason matching may be important is the feedline conductors common
mode signals to the antenna. I use choke baluns and isolated grounds along
low noise receiving antenna feedlines to "choke off" this conducted noise.

Matching could help also if the common mode signal is getting in the
feeder throughout the system. It would increase the level of differential
mode currents, and improve the ratio of antenna signal to noise ingress.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:12 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!news.infi.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.teleport.com!news.structured.net!news.tbcnet.com!wetware!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!torn!penage.cs.laurentian.ca!nickel.laurentian.ca!buchanan
From: [e-mail] (KTB)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: copperweld sources?
Date: 1 Sep 96 21:33:36 -0500
Organization: Laurentian University
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: nickel.laurentian.ca

Am looking for a source of copperweld wire, hopefully in Ontario.  Have
not had much success on the web, as yet.  In addition, the wire which
is used by MIG welders is copper coated steel.  Has anyone used this
material for antenna construction?
Ken


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:13 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!news.infi.net!imci5!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!cencore!forrest.gehrke
From: [e-mail] (FORREST GEHRKE)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Feedline impedance
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 96 09:46:00 -0300
Distribution: world
Organization: Central Core BBS, 201-575-8991
Reply-To: [e-mail] (FORREST GEHRKE)
References: <50832u$[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: PCBoard Version 15.22
X-Mailer: PCBoard/UUOUT Version 1.20
Lines: 56

CA> Is there a way to calculate the impedance at any point along a feedl
CA> for example you have a length of 450 Ohm open-wire, can you calculat
CA> impedance at 0.15 wavelengths?  Do I have enough information to calc
CA> impedance or do I need more information such as the load impedance,
CA> line is open or short circuited, etc.

Yes there is a way to calculate the impedance at any point on
the line.  I assume you mean *calculate* and not plot or measure.
Let me say at the very beginning--knowledge of complex algebra
helps.

450 ohm ladder line is very low loss so knowing the loss
characteristic of the line might not be too important unless
you are using a very long length of line.  I can think of
cases with arrays where even a small loss can be important.

Here are the parameters you need to know if you want to do a
rigorous calculation for any transmission line including loss:

     Zo of the line.
     R + jX of the load, i.e. the resistance and reactance.
     Frequency
     Length of the line
     Velocity factor of the line.
     Loss characteristic of the line, i.e. loss in dB per unit
                         length or in nepers per unit length.

You have to be careful with units with this calculation to
be sure they are internally consistent.

Ending up with MKS units is required, and many programming
languages' trig functions are based on radians instead of
degrees.

Including loss means you can not use circular trigonometric
functions but must use hyperbolic functions (cosh, sinh).
Should these functions not be available on your calculator
or programming language, direct evaluation of complex exponents
can be used.

Whatever units are used, you face additional translations,
whether degrees to radians, decibels to nepers, etc.
Depending upon the units for your length of line you
may need to know the speed of light! ;-)

If your eyes haven't glazed over yet, I would be glad to
mail the formulas; email doesn't lend itself to this.
It is not something you just run off your calculator though
it is possible with most scientific calculators.  I prefer
programming it as there are too many steps for errors to
creep in. I'm specially adept at doing that, usually at the
very beginning of the process. ;-)
//
  Forrest k2bt

 * RM 1.3 02583 * Unable to locate Coffee -- Operator Halted!


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:14 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!metro.atlanta.com!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!gatech!enews.sgi.com!news.corp.sgi.com!walter.cray.com!timbuk.cray.com!news4.mr.net!mr.net!chi-news.cic.net!newspump.sol.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Fractal antenna advantages? Relative merit?
Date: 4 Sep 1996 05:38:00 GMT
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <50j4jo$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 87.phoenix-1.az.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22ATT (Windows; U; 16bit)

[e-mail] (Peter Markham) wrote:
>I found during
>the same timeframe that it had less merit than a dipole at the same height.

Hi Pete, I don't know anything about a Gap. But, according to EZNEC,
a plain 1/2WL dipole 1/2WL off the ground is 1-2 'S' units better
than a plain 1/4WL vertical (broadside to the dipole). That's what
happens when one takes omnidirectional power and concentrates it in
a bidirectional pattern. A rotatable dipole will beat the socks off
a single vertical on 10m-20m (except for very long paths) and is much
more forgiving about the ground involved. However, two phased verticals
will rival a dipole and beat it for DX assuming a good ground.

I would advise anyone contemplating buying a $200-500 all-band vertical
to try a $40 ladder-line fed dipole first.

73, Cecil, W6RCA




From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:15 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.alfred.edu!clicnet!news.clic.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!philabs!blanket.mitre.org!agate!spool.mu.edu!howland.erols.net!usc!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!news.dtc.hp.com!hpscit.sc.hp.com!rkarlqu
From: [e-mail] (Richard Karlquist)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Fractal antenna advantages? Relative merit?
Date: 4 Sep 1996 16:43:41 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <50kbjt$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <50j4jo$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mentor23.scd.hp.com

In article <50j4jo$[e-mail]>,
Cecil Moore  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>Hi Pete, I don't know anything about a Gap. But, according to EZNEC,
>a plain 1/2WL dipole 1/2WL off the ground is 1-2 'S' units better
>than a plain 1/4WL vertical (broadside to the dipole). That's what
>happens when one takes omnidirectional power and concentrates it in
>a bidirectional pattern. A rotatable dipole will beat the socks off

Just wanted to agree with you.  I used to have a 130 foot dipole
at 55 feet.  I also had a 1/4 wave 80 meter vertical.  The dipole
was always 1 or 2 S units better than the vertical for distances
up to 2000 miles or so.  I frequently got "stongest signal on the
band" reports from LA, Seattle and VE7 (my QTH is near San
Francisco).  For DX, both the dipole and vertical were
abominable, barely being able to work JA's at sunrise with a KW.
I live on bumpy land near a rock quarry, so I have no ground
conductivity.  Read "Low Band DX'ing" and all of a sudden this will become
clear.

Before that, I used to have an inverting vee at 40 feet, and even
that was better than a commercial trap vertical.

Rick Karlquist N6RK
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:16 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news1.sunbelt.net!mel.hargray.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS
Date: 1 Sep 1996 07:15:53 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 29
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50br99$[e-mail]>
References: <5058n3$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <5058n3$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Fractenna) writes:

>I'm glad were communicating over WIRES because if I spoke to you on the
>PHONE I'd be talking with a teeny weeny embedded 900MHz fractal antenna
>inside my cordless phone.

I don't understand what that means.

>But, of course, as Tom says, "heaven help us".
>
>If some of you guys want some real scientific  info query Phil Salkind at
>[e-mail] and ask for the fractal antenna bibliography V4.0.

Hi Chip,

My "heaven help us" was directed to the use of 73 Magazine as a reference.
Let's face it, it isn't exactly the "Proceedings of the IRE"!

I have a specific question that I'm sure you'll be happy to answer.

Just what is it about the fractal shape that causes it to be more
efficient than any other type of distributed or lumped loading?

Since I don't get 73 maybe you can answer, was there any claim fractal
radials offer performance advantages over conventional radials, or offer a
performance advantage over any other distributed or lumped loaded radial

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:17 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-13.sprintlink.net!ratty.wolfe.net!news.aa.net!news.alt.net!news1.alt.net!news.serv.net!solaris.cc.vt.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS
Date: 2 Sep 1996 14:57:09 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 63
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50fam5$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <502893$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Radiomatt) writes:

>You're probably right, but why would the company advertise this as being
>suitable for PCS (2 GHz) use?
>I asked the question. But I don't have the answer. Are they a scam?

I wouldn't know. Certainly we could look at this with common sense.

Electromagnetic radiation is caused by accelerating charges, and the
effect increases with the number of charges accelerated or with an
increase in the net spacial distance the same number of charges are
displaced. The only other trickery is with *large* antennas, phase must be
correct so the charge movement appears to be more in step to things in the
favored directions.

Let's say we have two points 10 feet apart on 20 meters, and want to
maximize radiation efficiency. The most efficient system would be one that
has an absolutely   straight conductor end loaded by "capacitance" , like
end disks or balls. Maximum charges move the maximum distance.

Zig-zagging charges around a bunck of folds can only reduce efficiency
from the above system. It isn't how long a winding path charges travel
that increases radiation, it's the total distance the charges got moved in
*space*!  Zig-zag em all you want, and they can't move more than ten feet
total!

That's why the formula for radiation resistance of small loop antennas
only deals with the physical circumference, and not the area of the loop
filled in. That's why a helically loaded antenna has low radiation
efficiency when compared to a hat loaded antenna the same size. That's why
every self respecting antenna book in the work tells you to avoid bending
or folding current carrying parts of the antenna.

Suddenly, something pops up and says... "Hey, everything you thought you
knew is wrong. If you bend and fold an antenna, it works BETTER." Well,
pardon everyone from Marconi on for being so stupid and having it
backwards!

This even applies to radials. Radials should be straight, and folding or
bending them decreases efficiency..especially when they are folded in high
current areas. While radials may take less room when folded up, they
surely wouldn't work nearly as well as straight radials.

>In article <[e-mail]>, MADJID VE2GMI <[e-mail]>
writes:
>
>There is a lot of research going on in this field despite the
>criticism of some people in the newsgroup. Check the references
>bellow for mor info.

There's research going on about everything from little green men to how
street numbers we live at affects our luck, Madjid. Research is good, and
should be encouraged. But because something is being researched, it
doesn't mean it works...hi.

Antennas are pretty well established in science. It would be nice to see a
magic antenna that provides all kinds of benefits, but magical antennas
that have popped up from time to time all eventually disappear. Nothing so
far has disproven the rules engineers live by.

73,
Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:18 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!mr.net!chi-news.cic.net!newspump.sol.net!news.inc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS
Date: 3 Sep 1996 05:46:22 GMT
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <50ggne$[e-mail]>
References: <50e2n5$[e-mail]> <50frim$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 145.phoenix-2.az.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22ATT (Windows; U; 16bit)

[e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
>Are you saying if I fold a dipole fractally, it will give wider spacing?
>Wider spacing to what?

Hi Tom, Fractal non-linear folding will give wider spacing than
linear folding. If one is going to fold an antenna, fractal folding
is more efficient than linear folding because the average distance
between the fractal elements is greater than with a linear folding
method. That is what fractals are all about. I'm not saying it will
beat lumped constants, just any linear folding method.

73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC




From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:19 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS
Date: 2 Sep 1996 19:45:26 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 73
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50frim$[e-mail]>
References: <50e2n5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Cecil,

In article <50e2n5$[e-mail]>, Cecil Moore
<[e-mail]> writes:
>
>Hi Tom, theoretically fractal folding should yield the most
>efficient method of folding, because it would give a wider
>spacing between the elements than any other folding method.

Are you saying if I fold a dipole fractally, it will give wider spacing?
Wider spacing to what? What about a lumped component? Does fractal folding
have shorter conductor length or less shunt C for the same loading
reactance? Does it maintain uniform radiator current? Why is spacing any
different with a parallel stub or a lumped component?

Let's use some common sense on this. That's fractal loading is the last
thing we should do. For maximum efficiency, all current should be uniform
and in phase over the entire radiator, and the conductor should be as
short and smooth as possible (to minimize conductor losses).

A fractally loaded antenna is plainly contrary to these goals. In a
fractally loaded antenna the following undesirable effects occur:

1.) Loading is distributed, so current taper is increased, This decreases
the true radiation resistance.

2.) Each small distributed inductance is has increased parallel shunt C.
This increases circulating currents that do not contribiute to radiation,
with the result losses (remember it's I *squared* in loss calculations)
are greatly increased.

3.) Fractal folds prevent mutal coupling from increasing inductive
reactance for a given conductor length. We throw away "free loading
reactance".

4.) Conductor length is increased in a given physical volume of space,
increasing I*I*R losses.

Fractals do have an advantage in some systems. One example I can think of
is dissipating energy. To dissipate maximum heat in a open conductor, we
should fractally fold it. Perhaps that's why heating elements and light
bulb filaments are fractals, and have been fractals long before the
"fractal fad" started.

Car radiators and air filters are a wise use of fractals, and sponges
another.

Even in antennas, I'm sure there are special cases where a large fractal
can produce gain. The "Cohen dipole" operated on the third harmonic is one
example, even though at the fundamental it's slightly worse than a regular
dipole.

But even on the third harmonic, where the "Cohen dipole" shows directive
gain, the same or MORE gain could be achieved in the same physical area
with a different element arrangements.

If three independent short dipoles are simply spaced the same distance and
fed with the same phase, the pattern is the same. There is no magic in
these antennas.

>I'm going to model a fractally folded dipole vs one with
>loading coils and see what EZNEC says.

You might check with Roy first. I don't think, without great care, the NEC
programs will give you correct results. Remember funny things can happen
to the analysis if the radiator is folded up.

Most important, remember the value of feedpoint resistance tells us
nothing about antenna efficiency...since feedpoint resistance includes
both transmission line impedance transformation effects in the radiator
and loss resistance.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:20 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newspump.sol.net!news.inc.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-8.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 10:09:55 -0700
Organization: Intel Corp., Chandler, AZ
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <50ggne$[e-mail]> <50k7vc$[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 2.01 (Win16; I)

W8JI Tom wrote:
CM >That is what fractals are all about. I'm not saying it will
CM >beat lumped constants, just any linear folding method.

> With a stub linear loaded antenna, the stub is simply
> folded along the element.

Hi Tom, I don't think my meaning was clear. My statement excluded
helicals, coils, caps, stubs, etc. Take a 100ft nothing-but-wire
dipole and fold it to 50ft using two dimensions. IMO, a fractal
fold will minimize the negative effects of folding given those
boundary conditions. That's all I was trying to say.

73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:21 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: FRACTAL ANTENNAS-- RIGHT to PUBLISH
Date: 5 Sep 1996 18:09:56 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 16
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50nj3k$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hi Tom--

Its my right to publish as is any scientist's and I won't do it over a
newsgroup. If the info is available, I reference. If its not, I won't
mention it.

Why would I possibly want to disseminate intellectual property over the
newsgroup? Fractal antennas are not 'shareware' but are patent pending by
several different reserachers.

Your obsession has attempted to give readers of this newsgroup an
aboslutely incorrect view. LIES is more accurate.

YOU HAVE NEVER BUILT OR TESTED A FRACTAL ANTENNA@@@@@! ADMIT IT!

So you don't KNOW what they do...even if you don't 'believe' me.


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:22 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!nntp04.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!agate!newsgate.duke.edu!news.eff.org!news.umbc.edu!cs.umd.edu!hecate.umd.edu!dailyplanet.wam.umd.edu!ham
From: [e-mail] (Scott Rosenfeld NF3I)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: FS: Cushcraft 416TB satellite boomer antenna
Date: 2 Sep 1996 21:18:19 GMT
Organization: I need to put my ORGANIZATION here.
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <50fiur$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: w3eax.umd.edu
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.swap:72162 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:23958

16 element 435 MHz boomer antenna, with manual.

Antenna is in excellent condition, sold for abt $100
new.  Asking $50.

Thanks!
--
* Scott Rosenfeld NF3I Burtonsville, MD FM19mc QRV 80-10/6/2/440 *
*** 6m 75 grids worked on 8 watts *** HF 138 cfmd * QRP-L #147 ***
** QRP ARCI #9054 ** DXCC/WAS/WAC *** 100% dipole powered HF/6m **
* 301-549-1022 h / 301-982-1015 w *** 145.490- 147.225+ PL 156.7 *


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:23 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.pitt.edu!news.pgh.net!wombat
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: FS: Roahn BX series 48' tower
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 96 01:32:53 GMT
Organization: Pittsburgh OnLine, Inc.
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <50j4id$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.210.70.154
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

Sections 3-8 tower dated late 1976, in 1992 we took it down and cleaned it up,

some joker painted it Hunter green. but it looks ok 48' tall. all hardware but

mounting brackets, located in W Penn Pittsburgh, breaks down to 8' sections
for easy transport best reasonable offer will deliver 100 miles from pgh, pa.
respond [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:23 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!cencore!forrest.gehrke
From: [e-mail] (FORREST GEHRKE)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Grade LE Phenolic Insulat
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 96 09:00:00 -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: 15

FD> For example, I use Grade LE phenolic plates to mount Yagi elements o
FD> their supporting booms.  I fabricated the 12" x 12" x 1" Grade LE pl
FD> that support the full size elements of my three element 40M beams in

Frank,
Since you are using phenolic mounting plates for your
Yagi elements, it sounds as though your elements are
insulated from the boom? Any reason for this?

That phenolic isn't cheap; is aluminum equally priced?
It's been awhile since I bought any.
//
  Forrest k2bt

 * RM 1.3 02583 * DOS: poorhouse. OS/2: penthouse. Windows: outhouse.


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:26 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.campus.mci.net!uky.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Walter R Francis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: help- 440 Mhz Twin lead Jpole
Date: 3 Sep 1996 13:55:07 GMT
Organization: The hand that uses the Amiga is the hand that rules the world.
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: node-01-07.dialin.uky.edu
X-Newsreader: THOR 2.22 (Amiga;TCP/IP) *UNREGISTERED*


On 01-Sep-96 19:47:17, John Rice articulated:

>HuH ???   How, may I ask, can you measure a 1.5:1 SWR, but yet have no
>radiated power ? This defies logic.

I would have to say a 2m JPole is basically a big dummy load for 70cm, I have
noticed this exact same problem, and so have several people in town.  Perhaps
someone else can answer WHY, but that's just how it is.

However, a separate feed and another J on the long part of the JPole will make
a useful dual band antenna, I think sometimes this is called a Super JPole.
But I've decided that JPole are quite large and bulky for the gain they have.
Not to mention the feedline radiation/pattern skewing problems.

--
 -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.. .
 .  Walter Francis                                               _. KT4LH  .
 -         HP48GX  Alinco DJ580  Icom 281  Kenwood 530S         o:o        -
 .  [e-mail]                                   Life begins on 80  .
 --... ...-- --... ...-- --... ...-- --... ...-- --... ...-- --... ...--  ..



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:28 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-ana-7.sprintlink.net!news.hti.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-5.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-9.sprintlink.net!news.cdsnet.net!news.magicnet.net!nntp.newsfirst.com!nntp.crosslink.net!munnari.OZ.AU!spool.mu.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!newsrelay.netins.net!news.netins.net!mr.net!news.mr.net!timbuk.cray.com!news.sgi.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-13.sprintlink.net!nntp.earthlink.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: HELP: Antenna Tuner Design Needed
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 18:19:50 GMT
Organization: Earthlink Network, Inc.
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <50hshf$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: max1-ot-ca-39.earthlink.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.scanner:55901 rec.radio.shortwave:78245 rec.radio.swap:72225 rec.radio.cb:30494 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:23981 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:32088 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:16617 rec.radio.amateur.misc:106400

Michael Neidich <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Need a schematic/parts list to build a receiving antenna
>tuner/preselector 10-25 MHz, mostly to reject interfering out of band
>signals.  Point me in the right direction if there is a good commercial
>unit, please.
>Mike
MFJ-956 is $39.99.  One year unconditional money back warranty.  Comes
with a schematic.  By the time you add up the cost of the box, the
knobs, the switch, the fixed inductors, the variable capacitor, and
the 2 ea. SO-239 connectors, you may decide to keep it.
dr
Dave Rickmers            I'd wake up and
[e-mail]   there'd be nothing...



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:29 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!hunter.premier.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!winternet.com!n1ott.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!tor.istar!east.istar!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!venger.snds.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (%RSellers%)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Hog Mobile -- any hams doing it?  (not a Joke).
Date: 5 Sep 1996 19:19:39 GMT
Organization: Sundstrand Corporation
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <50n94c$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aero.snds.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.14
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24015 rec.radio.amateur.misc:106462

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
>
>Interested in contacting Harley Davidson owners who
>have successfully installed HF on their HOG.
>Interested to learn your antenna / HF configurations.
>Also interested in any motorcycle mobile HF nets.
>
>No..this is not April Fools.  Am truly curious.
>thanks,
>Joe
>
>(1973 Sportster in storage....)
>----------------------------------------------------------
>Amateur Radio:  BV/N0IAT   Taipei TAIWAN Republic of China
>        http://www.isite.net.tw/bv1al/e-hist.htm
>ex.  7J1AOF (Japan)  YU3/N0IAT (Slovenia)  KA0ZDH (Novice)
>Licensed Radio Amateur since 1986.  Comments are mine only.
>----------------------------------------------------------

I have a friend (WA9FFL) that is a died in wool Harley fan. He makes
several long road trips a year. His most recent was to Sturgis this year.
I know that he has a TenTec Scout and some Stick antennas that he uses
and gets great contacts. I don't know how he would relate to the term
"HOG MOBILE" but he wouldn't object to motorcycle mobile one bit. He is
quite proud of his Harley though.

73,

Roger Sellers
KB9LBU



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:30 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!southwind.net!symbios.com!csn!nntp-xfer-2.csn.net!yuma!purdue!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!news.cse.psu.edu!news.ecn.bgu.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!cyberstation.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Donald Young)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How do I make a inside scanner radio antenna ???
Date: Sun, 01 Sep 1996 16:00:12 GMT
Organization: CyberStation, Inc
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <4vqlm7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup28.cyberstation.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227

On 25 Aug 1996 22:56:07 GMT, [e-mail] (Don Sterner) wrote:

>In article <[e-mail]>, Steve St. Denis said...
>>
>>I just moved into a basement apartment and the landlord won't let me
>>put up my Discone antenna on the roof, I was wondering if there was an
>>easy indoor antenna to make for a scanner that will work across the
>>spectrum 25 to 800 mhz bands, The outdoor Discone antenna worked great
>>across all the bands on my realistic pro-2005 scanner and I was
>>wondering if there was a indoor antenna that I could make for my
>>apartment. Any information on how to go about making one would be of
>>great hel to me.
>>If it is not to much trouble please email any information to:
>>Steve
>>[e-mail]
>>tia
>>
>>
>It won't be much of an antenna if it must fit inside the scanner
>as your title suggests.
>

Not sure that any stations further than acoss the street would be
received by a system using a below ground antenna.  I suggest you move
again,


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:31 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.fast.net!netaxs.com!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!mr.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!quagga.ru.ac.za!uct.ac.za!itu1.sun.ac.za!ppak
From: [e-mail] (PPA Kotze)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: how large must a monopole ground plane be?
Date: 3 Sep 1996 20:48:17 GMT
Organization: University of Stellenbosch
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <50i5ih$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 146.232.39.11
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

I guess the title says it all.
I want to know how large the ground plane for a monopole antenna, or any anten
na that uses the method of images concept.  Is there a nice formula to calcula
te it with.

I have read that a rule of thumb is that the ground plane should be at least a
s wide as the largest/longest element of the antenna.

Aaany help would be greatly appreciated.
Pieter Kotze
ZR1BC
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:32 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!oleane!jussieu.fr!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.erols.net!news.starnet.net!thepit.trucom.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Marty Albert)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How to get better FM reception
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 1996 23:47:36 GMT
Organization: TruCom Internet Services
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <50aj4r$[e-mail]>
References: <4vsjhb$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup9.trucom.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Joseph.Ledva,pai830,xxxx) wrote:

>Howdy all,

>Please excuse my lack of knowledge in this area and dumb question.
>The FM reception in my house sucks. When I run the cable TV cable
>to the receivers it doesn't get much better. I have 3 radios I
>listen to: one in the basement (main stereo), a boom box in the garage,
>and a receiver in my family room. I would like to get better FM reception
>for all of these units. I was thinking about running a wire to the
>attic and connecting that to my receiver in the basement. Would this
>be the best way to go about doing it? What type of cable should I
>use to run up to the attic? If I run one cable to the attic can I
>connect it to all 3 systems? Can I just run a piece of coax cable? Should
>I terminate it if I do?

>As you can see I don't know diddly about it so any help is GREATLY
>appreciated. Please respond to me directly for I don't get much time
>to look at news groups.

>Thanks in advance !

>Joe Ledva
>[e-mail]

>P.S. Is there a FAQ somewhere?

Hi, Joe:

Most cable TV systems run FM broadcast through their cables, but you
need a signal splitter to get the correct signal. Such splitters are
available at Radio Shack and most TV shops for just a couple of
dollars.

Most such splitters want you to run 300 ohm twin-lead (the "old" TV
wire that used to run from an antenna to the TV) from the splitter to
the radio.

If you have several cable TV outlets close to your radios, you can put
a splitter at each one to get your FM.

Take Care



Marty Albert - [e-mail]
Amateur Radio: KC6UFM@KC6UFM.#SEMO.MO.USA.NOAM

Heartland Internet Services

*****************************************************
Want real long term, residual income?
http://freedomstarr.com/?AL7837318
*****************************************************



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:33 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!wa2ise
From: [e-mail] (Robert Casey)
Subject: Re: Improving antenna on cordless phone?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
References: <[e-mail]> <50ibib$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 20:20:16 GMT
Lines: 7
Sender: [e-mail]

I have a 49MHz cordless phone and I got better range when I used a cliplead
cliped to the base's antenna and wrapped the cliplead twisted around the
incomming phone line wire.  I also formed a small choke coil in the phone wire
right at the connector at the base unit so I wouldn't "short" out the RF
signal from the base's antenna to it's ground.  The power lead running
to the base's plug-in powerpack would form the other leg of a crude "dipole"
antenna, or more accurately the ground wire for a random wire antenna.


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:34 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!demos!news.stealth.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.erols.net!nntp04.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!news.abs.net!news.scn.org!freenet.unbc.edu!news.mag-net.com!ve7tcp.ampr.org!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Stiles D Daniel)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Indoor Antenna Suggestions
Date: 2 Sep 96 04:22:26 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]


I have used one of the MFJ portable antennas.  Hopefully, we are talking
about the same model.  The one I refer to has a telescoping whip and a
tuner at the base.

I have made contacts with it.  but I would imagine the efficiency is
pretty bad.  I have also gotten RF tinkles from it. ( No I did not touch
the antenna).

If you have any other way, I would advise it.  I am not an antenna expert
by any measure.  But there has to be another way to go.

Dan KB1BG


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:35 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!demos!Gamma.RU!srcc!news1.relcom.ru!mcsun!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!oleane!jussieu.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!howland.erols.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Indoor Antenna Suggestions
Date: 2 Sep 1996 19:11:15 GMT
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <50fbgj$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 50.phoenix-2.az.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22ATT (Windows; U; 16bit)

[e-mail] (Buddy Sohl) wrote:
>No one ever knew I was a ham, nor did anyone see the antennaes.

 - Or feel the radiation. Don't know how much power you were
running, but IMO, apartment antennas should be used for QRP
only. I've got cataracts, probably from too much RF, about 15
years ahead of schedule. Through ignorance, I gave my family
considerable doses of RF radiation when I was in high school.

Some say there's no proof that RF causes ill effects. When I
was a kid, every large shoe store had an X-Ray machine so one
could see one's feet inside one's shoes. Kids played with them
for hours. At the time, there was no proof that X-Ray's were
dangerous.

How would you feel if you found out your next door neighbor was
running a KW all night into a wall-mounted antenna one foot from
your head on your pillow?

73, Cecil, W6RCA




From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:37 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.imagine.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!news.netserv.com!fsc.fujitsu.com!agate!info.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!news.sgi.com!swrinde!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: mstrjl <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Indoor Antenna Suggestions
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 10:35:22 -0700
Organization: What? Me organized?
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.st-louis-2.mo.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E (Win16; I)

The effectiveness of an indoor antenna depends on several factors (which
I'm sure you've already considered) structure of dwelling (materials
used), height above "ground", connections to REAL (earth) ground, desired
band(s) how much power you want to run, etc...

Having lived in an apartment, I think I can say that I've probably read
every "invisible" antenna book - and tried most of the tricks...probably
drove my neighbors crazy.  I've used super thin, "invisible" wire thrown
from my apartment to a nearby tree as an antenna - indoor dipoles tacked
to the ceiling, including "slinky" dipoles - home built helically (sp?)
wound verticals -  and commercial built mobile antennas resting on "some
sort" of ground plane from a refridgerator to aluminum foil, to a porch
railing.  If I could think of it, I tried it, and lost a couple of finals
in my radios for my trouble sometimes.  Over the years I've gained a lot
of insight into indoor antennas, and will be glad to pass on any
knowledge I have that might help you when you come up with something to
try.

You (or anyone, for that matter) feel free to E-mail me when you want to
kick some ideas around....


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:39 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!tezcat!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!realtime.net!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Lightning protection for vertical
Date: 3 Sep 1996 19:02:37 GMT
Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bastion.dejanews.com
X-RTcode: 6c95019d32cd89dd9c2c80fe
X-Originating-IP-Addr: 128.100.160.136 (ppp16.chass.utoronto.ca)

Hi all. I'm playing around with vertical antennas at the in-laws' cottage and
having a great time. It is a full 1/4 l on 30m up 15' with 6 roof-mounted
counterpoises. In an A/B test with a 100' flat-top up 30' with tuned lines the
other op gave the vertical a 579, but the flat-top 449. The noise is certainly
worse, though - just like the books say.

I have some questions relating to this set-up and how it relates to theory.
1. The lowest SWR we have got is 1.8:1 - not a big deal (I've read Maxwell!)
but I'm wondering what might introduce that sort of mismatch. An ideal ground
gives 36 ohms = around 1.5:1 SWR. Anything worse should lower the SWR. The roo
f
made of metal plates bolted together, though, so I though it would be pretty h
ot.
There are some metal object that come up out of the roof; could they change th
e
reactance of the ant?

2. Is the additional noise on a vertical ant caused by vert. polarized atmosph
eric
noise, or just man-made? This is up at the cottage, so I'm surprised if it's t
he
latter.

3. I'm thinking of putting this ant on the roof of our apt. building 11 storie
s up.
I'm on the 10th floor now, so the cable run would be short. but I'm really wor
ried
about lightning strikes. Can anyone point me to a practical guide to making th
is
really safe. I did the sensible thing and looked up G. Coffman's posts in
DejaNews, but I could find none with this specific info (still, I learned a *l
ot*
about lightning!)

73, VE3UWL

Bruce G. Robertson Dept. of Classics, U of Toronto

3.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This article was posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News:
    http://www.dejanews.com/      [Search, Post, and Read Usenet News!]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:40 1996
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner,rec.radio.scanner,alt.radio.pirate,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!jolt.pagesat.net!pagesat.net!iglou!news
From: [e-mail] (Richard D. Meadows)
Subject: Re: Looking for a mailorder outfit to purchase a handheld scanner
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: lou-5-7.iglou.net
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: SBWS
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
References: <4vg791$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 06:51:05 GMT
Lines: 19
Xref: news2.epix.net alt.radio.scanner:32997 rec.radio.scanner:55943 alt.radio.pirate:16259 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24001 rec.radio.amateur.misc:106433 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:16877 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:32120 rec.radio.amateur.policy:36258

[e-mail] wrote:

>Douglas Alexander wrote:
>>
>> Looking for a good mailorder firm to purchase a handheld scanner from:
>>

>http://www.demon.co.uk/javiation/

You might want to check out  Copper Electronics

They are on the Web

http://www.copper.com

1-800-968-8500  and I think you can get a free catalog.

Richard



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:40 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!tezcat!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (K1BQT)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Matching folded dipole to 50 ohm line ?
Date: 1 Sep 1996 23:36:39 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 8
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50dko7$[e-mail]>
References: <50aba4$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (K1BQT)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hi Chris--

Here's another answer available in the ARRL Antenna Handbook.  This
reference provides data for building folded dipoles from 80-10 meters
using a section of the feedline and a capacitor as a 300-50 matching
network.  These antennas are easy to build and perform very well.

Rick--K1BQT


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:41 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: uk.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.space,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.boats.paddle,aus.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: NEW URL, please update !!
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 96 23:12:24 EDT
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lunac0.moonstar.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: NEWTNews & Chameleon -- TCP/IP for MS Windows from NetManage
Xref: news2.epix.net uk.radio.amateur:15476 rec.radio.amateur.space:7446 rec.radio.amateur.misc:106376 rec.radio.amateur.dx:268 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:23973 rec.boats.paddle:47360 aus.radio.amateur.misc:817


My URL has changed. please bookmark it and THANKS for the
GREAT response so far !!!

Amateur Radio -- Civil War -- Kayaking -- Nascar
Blue Ridge River Runners
Central Virginia Contest Club

http://luna.moonstar.com/~wa4pgm/
[e-mail]

Tks 73,
Kyle



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:43 1996
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 21:36:38 -0400
From: "Vernon J. Kunes, Jr." <[e-mail]>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Opinions and experience please
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.25.250.198
Lines: 30
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.sgi.com!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!news.paonline.com!news3.paonline.com!206.25.250.198

mstrjl wrote:
>
> Ditto here...
>
> I've spent years playing with every antenna that would fit in my small
> back yard.  I've used the Cushcraft R7, Gap Voyager, Ap8, and more...
> along with center fed, offset, and end fed dipoles - coaxial fed and open
> wire feeds,...etc...
>
> My two cents: a plain old center fed dipole (get it as high as you can
> and then forget it) will provide you with just as much enjoyment (and
> contacts) as a $500.00 commercial vertical whether half or 5/8 wave.
>
> I've run a vertical and dipole at the same time and switched between them
> and hardly noticed any difference.  In fact, once I had just put up my
> new Cushcraft R7 and did a comparison test with a station in Germany - he
> liked my "double bazooka" dipole (made from scraps I had lying around)
> better than the expensive R7 (I sent the R7 back for a refund).
>
> My suggestion:  Save your money - put up a diploe and enjoy it - the
> differences between a dipole and vertical are not worth the trouble or
> expense...
>
> P.S. If you want to converse through E-mail, feel free.  I love to talk
> about antennas....:-I had a Hustler multiband vertical I tried for a year or
 so. I gave it
to a friend (only because he wanted to try it, not to be mean!!!). I put
up a foursided 80mtr loop, fed it with coax, and I am having more fun
with it than I ever did with the vertical. I guess I essentially agree
with you.
73 de N2YZS    Vern


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:44 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!tezcat!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (GBohner)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Performance of SGC Antenna Tuner on Motorhome??
Date: 3 Sep 1996 14:54:06 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 17
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50huse$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Does anyone have experience with the SGC Antenna Tuner for the ham radio
bands on a motorhome?  What is your configuration (vertical attacted to
ladder, wire around the roof, etc)  What is the size and material of your
motorhome (aluminum or fiberglass)?  Have you devised a good way to keep
the overall height down or to lower the antenna for travel?  What do you
use for ground?

I would like to operate primarily 20 and 40, but also 75 and 15 meters.  I
have a 35' bus-style motorhome, aluminum sides, fiberglass front & back,
rubber roof.  It is somthing like 11.5 feet high, so there isn't enough
room to mount a permanent vertical.  I am kind of stuck for a good idea on
how to put up somthing that will work, yet is easy to lay down for travel.
 Since the coach is 11.5 feet high, I can't just reach up there and flip
it over or detach it.

Tnx in advance for your ideas.
Guy, w6ljl


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:45 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!mcsun!EU.net!Norway.EU.net!oslonett.no!sn.no!newsfeed.tip.net!news.agora.dk!dkbbbs!ivar.sonne-moerch
From: [e-mail] (IVAR SONNE-MOERCH)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: PT > DK on Short Wave
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 96 16:52:00 +0100
Distribution: world
Organization: Danish Key Board BBS - Copenhagen Denmark - [phone]
Reply-To: [e-mail] (IVAR SONNE-MOERCH)
X-Newsreader: PCBoard Version 15.3
X-Mailer: PCBoard/UUOUT Version 1.30
Lines: 13

I have a rather urgent need to receive RDP International - Radio
Portugal on shortwave on my location in Copenhagen, Denmark. My radio
is a ghetto blaster receiving well on shortwave 6.0-18.0, and I have
the frequencies and times. I need to go at different times to 11975,
9815, 9615, and 9780. But I think I need to rig up some kind of
antenna (currently, I am listening shortwave with internal antenna and
a string of electric cable (!). Can anyone direct me how to widen this
cheap system in other to get reception of Portugal?

PS No money to very much. Shoestring budget!


 * RM 1.31 2540 * Sin against God, not the Bureaucracy. God will forgive you.


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:46 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ssnet.com!news.pcnet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-4.sprintlink.net!mcsun!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!news.rl.af.mil!rl.af.mil!robinsona
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: R7 Question
Date: 4 Sep 1996 16:45:21 GMT
Organization: USAF Rome Laboratory
Lines: 22
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <50kbn1$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ce7.ce.rl.af.mil

In message <[e-mail]>, Mike James <[e-mail]> writes:

>Peter Hertler wrote:
>>
>  I have a Cushcraft R7 that is mounted on a 1.875 inch O.D. steel pole that
is 23 feet above ground level. ........ I was surprised at the amount of sway
the antenna had.  It was a gusty day here in Toronto on Sunday and I gues I
just did not expect to see the R7 sway, and I am guessing, approximately 1.5
feet. Is this normal in a light gusty day, or are they somewhat more rigid?
>>

Peter:

        I also have an R7 mounted 20' above ground level and the top of the
antenna sways 1.5', maybe more.  I don't think you need to guy the antenna, bu
t
make sure your steel pole is guyed as close to the antenna attachment point as

possible.

73s

Al Robinson   W2JUV



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:47 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.eden.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (John Bradley (KK5MH))
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: R7 Question
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 17:37:13 GMT
Organization: Adhesive Media, Inc.
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <50ker5$[e-mail]>
References: <4vut3p$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: net-1-054.austin.eden.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Mike James <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Peter,
>My R7000 also sways, but not as much as what you describe.  You might
>consider guying (of course using non-conductive UV resistant cord)
>about 1/4 length from the top.

>Mike James
>KE0CH

I too have an R7 that sways in the wind.  I haven't had any problem
with bending or breaking though.  I've talked to at least 2 people on
the air, however, that have said the only R7's they have seen break
were ones that were guyed.  They claimed they broke at one of the
traps during very cold weather.  They both theorized that the forces
that normally would have been distributed throughout the length of the
antenna (and absorbed by bending aluminum) were concentrated at the
guy point.

73,
John KK5MH



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:48 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!n1van.istar!van-bc!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jeff Corey)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: R7-Hi SWR except for 40m
Date: 4 Sep 1996 13:53:05 GMT
Organization: BMW CCA
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <50k1k1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: corey.pr.mcs.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.6

I have just installed a Cushcraft R7 on a 3ft tripod, roof mounted.  I used a
5' section of radio trash steel mast on the tripod.  Everything measures out
on the ground in terms of dimensions, and I am feeding it with 100' of RG58/U.

It hears fantastic, and load up fine on 40m with a 1.2 SWR.  All other bands
the SWR is so HI that the Kenwood TS-440S antenna tuner wont tune it.  I do
have a MFJ tuner I am going to install in a day or so, but my thoughts are
that it should run "out of the box" with the SWR claimed on the instructions.

Any suggestions on how to troubleshoot it?


73  de

Jeff Corey
WB9KAZ



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:49 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.nevada.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-ana-7.sprintlink.net!news.usit.net!col-max65.usit.net!user
From: [e-mail] (Charles)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: R7-Hi SWR except for 40m
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 09:20:22 -0500
Organization: United States Internet, Inc.
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <50k1k1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.230.9.96

In article <50k1k1$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jeff Corey) wrote:

> I have just installed a Cushcraft R7 on a 3ft tripod, roof mounted.  I used
a
> 5' section of radio trash steel mast on the tripod.  Everything measures out

> on the ground in terms of dimensions, and I am feeding it with 100' of RG58/
U.
>
> It hears fantastic, and load up fine on 40m with a 1.2 SWR.  All other bands

> the SWR is so HI that the Kenwood TS-440S antenna tuner wont tune it.  I do
> have a MFJ tuner I am going to install in a day or so, but my thoughts are
> that it should run "out of the box" with the SWR claimed on the instructions
.
>
> Any suggestions on how to troubleshoot it?
>
>
> 73  de
>
> Jeff Corey
> WB9KAZ


Use aome RG8 coax. The RG58 has a lot of loss at that long of a run.


Charls   KD4HHX


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:50 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpbs2500.boi.hp.com!hpax!jholly
From: [e-mail] (Jim Hollenback)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: R7-Hi SWR except for 40m
Date: 4 Sep 1996 22:27:45 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard Cupertino Site
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <50kvp1$[e-mail]>
References: <50k1k1$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpwsmjh1.cup.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2.2]

Charles ([e-mail]) wrote:
: In article <50k1k1$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jeff Corey) wrote:

: > I have just installed a Cushcraft R7 on a 3ft tripod, roof mounted.  I use
d a
: > 5' section of radio trash steel mast on the tripod.  Everything measures o
ut
: > on the ground in terms of dimensions, and I am feeding it with 100' of RG5
8/U.
: >
: > It hears fantastic, and load up fine on 40m with a 1.2 SWR.  All other ban
ds
: > the SWR is so HI that the Kenwood TS-440S antenna tuner wont tune it.  I d
o
: > have a MFJ tuner I am going to install in a day or so, but my thoughts are

: > that it should run "out of the box" with the SWR claimed on the instructio
ns.
: >
: > Any suggestions on how to troubleshoot it?
: >
: >
: > 73  de
: >
: > Jeff Corey
: > WB9KAZ


: Use aome RG8 coax. The RG58 has a lot of loss at that long of a run.


: Charls   KD4HHX

Of course the lower loss RG8 will only make the SWR higher at the TW-440,
end and Jeff will not be happy with that result.

But that is a good suggestion, using RG8 instead of RG58. Working on the
roof will probably be somewhat a pain, so why not take the mess down and
work on the ground? Putting the R7 up 5-8 foot will be useable. The
drawing dimensions should work. But start at 10M and work down. First,
can you draw some conclusion as to where the resonance is in respect to
10 meters? Start around 28.001 and take a SWR reading. Work your way up
in 200 kHz steps. With this you can see if your resonance is high or low.
Adjust the secion BELOW the first trap to move the resonance. Resonance
below 10 meters = antenna to long. Resonance on the high end of 10 meters
means it is to short. Adjust the 10 meter section to see if you can
get resonance. Once 10 meters is tweaked, go to 12 meters and check that
out. If you can't get 10 meters adjusted, some thing else is very wrong.
My guess would be the 10 meter trap.

good luck!
73, Jim, WA6SDM
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:51 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!news.inc.net!newspump.sol.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news.encore.com!psoper
From: [e-mail] (Pete Soper)
Subject: TH6 antenna model needed
Organization: Encore Computer Corporation
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 15:21:02 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: sysgem1.encore.com
Sender: [e-mail] (Usenet News)
Lines: 7

Any pointers to a TH6 tribander model would be appreciated. Preference
would be EZNEC, ELNEC, or NEC but any specs for the elements and traps
would help.

Regards,
Pete
KS4XG


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:52 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!panix!netaxs.com!usenet
From: "C.D.Sage" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Toroidal Helical Antenna/Radar ?
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 14:58:53 -0700
Organization: Sage & Co.
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mtholly1-2.slip.netaxs.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; U)

Given the isotropic like radiation pattern of the Contrawound Toroidal
Helical antenna, could it be used to enchance the range of vision in the
present, "look-down, shoot-down," radar systems in military applications?
Thanks in advance,
 C.D.Sage


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:53 1996
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 21:38:40 -0400
From: "Vernon J. Kunes, Jr." <[e-mail]>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: which vert ant to get
References: <[e-mail]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.25.250.198
Lines: 18
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.sgi.com!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!news.paonline.com!news3.paonline.com!206.25.250.198

Hank wrote:
>
> for some reason this didn't stay up on the news group the last time
> I posted it.  Here it is again.  I'm finally moving into my own
> house with a yard that I can put up a vertical antenna in.  I'm
> trying to deceide between
>
> Gap challenger
> GAP Titan
> Cushcraft R-7
> Butternut HF9vx
> Hy Gain DX-77
> Somer DC280 (this a all band discone)
>
> Any and all comments are welcome!
> Tnx 73 de Hank [e-mail] my opinion, none. An 80 meter wire loop
 works just fine, and will
cost you alot less. Good luck.
73 de N2YZS   Vern


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:54 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news1.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uuneo.neosoft.com!insync!news.ios.com!usenet
From: Hank <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: which vert ant to get
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 15:17:33 -0700
Organization: Internet Online Services
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-66.ts-12.nyc.idt.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win95; I; 16bit)

for some reason this didn't stay up on the news group the last time
I posted it.  Here it is again.  I'm finally moving into my own
house with a yard that I can put up a vertical antenna in.  I'm
trying to deceide between

Gap challenger
GAP Titan
Cushcraft R-7
Butternut HF9vx
Hy Gain DX-77
Somer DC280 (this a all band discone)

Any and all comments are welcome!
Tnx 73 de Hank [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:54 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!news1.sunbelt.net!mel.hargray.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: mstrjl <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Which Vertical
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 09:35:40 -0700
Organization: What? Me organized?
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.st-louis-2.mo.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E (Win16; I)

In my experience (I've used a lot of different commercial verticals),
they are basically the same.  If you think about it, the are basically
pieces of metal sticking up in the air 25 to 30 feet.  Some use coils,
some use traps, etc...not a whole heck of a lot of difference in the
basic design and use...you could actually just build you own.

If a good, basic open-wire fed dipole is simply "out of the question",
then I'd go for the 7000 - it's had some good things said about it
from other hams...


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:55 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!nntp.coast.net!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!nntp.crl.com!usenet
From: Lance Halle <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Which Vertical
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 18:41:50 -0700
Organization: Halle's Service, Inc.
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: a107023.phx1.as.crl.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win16; I)

Tom, AE4TB wrote:
>     I'm soon to live in an antenna restricted area.  Am considering a
> vertical as a solution.

        I'm very happy with a Cushcraft AP8A with their radial kit.  It's 10-80
including the WARC bands. 2:1 VSWR on all bands except 40 and 80 which are 150
Khz and
100kHz 2:1 bandwidth. The LONGEST radial in the kit is 31 feet.  They use a st
ub tuned
aproach to radial design, and it seem to work. The price differance between th
is and
an R7000 make it an easy choice.

KC7FVX (Lance)


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:56 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.compuserve.com!newsmaster
From: [e-mail] (Tom, AE4TB)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Which Vertical
Date: 2 Sep 1996 23:48:31 GMT
Organization: CompuServe Incorporated
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: hd14-207.compuserve.com
X-Newsreader: OUI PRO 1.5.0.1

Greetings,

    I'm soon to live in an antenna restricted area.  Am considering a
vertical as a solution.

    Would love to hear any of your experiences with the newer half-wave
verticals--GAP, Cushcraft, HyGain, MFJ, etc.  Will have to mount it at
roof height to avoid any problems with local children, so a radial
network is out.

    I'm leaning towards the GAP Titan, as it covers 80-10 including
WARC. At $289, it seems reasonable compared to the R7000 and DX-77.  But
I'd rather spend the money now and not have to do it twice.  (actually a
tri-bander at 75 feet sounds much better!!)

TU es 73 de Tom, AE4TB



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:57 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news1.sunbelt.net!mel.hargray.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Why does the coax current stay on the inner shield?
Date: 1 Sep 1996 07:15:54 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 43
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50br9a$[e-mail]>
References: <505b0q$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Ed and Jack,

In article <505b0q$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>
>Hi Ed,
>
>I'm not an engineer, but I have the answer.  The current
>is induced on the inner shield by the fields surrounding
>the center conductor.  The current cannot pass through the
>shield to the outside due to skin effect.
>
>>Also does the current in the center conductor stay on the
>>outside of the inner conductor . . .
>
>Yes, for the same reason (skin effect).

I'd like to add we have to very careful, Ed, in applying this effect to
the real world. The effect we actually "see" is much different than the
simple explaination "current is always inside the shield".

The high frequency magnetic fields inside the cable makes current "want"
to flow on the inside of the shield, and outside of the center conductor.
It freely moves there because of the fields.

How you connect the cable greatly affects the external fields and external
currents. While what Jack says is true in the physical explaination, the
results you observe outside the cable can be quite different.

If the source or load is not "properly" connected, some current "moves" to
the outside of the shield. The amount of current on the outside can be
much larger than any current inside the cable, or nothing at all.

The most foolproof way to look at this problem it to remember if one end
of the cable is fed with equal and opposite currents on the two
conductors, and the other end is a load that loads the line in a way that
allows equal and opposite current flow from the line conductors, all
current will flow inside the cable. The minute anything happens to make
this not be true, current apears on the outside of the line and the line
will radiate. Many things can cause this effect.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 05 21:15:58 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!hunter.premier.net!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (GBohner)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WTB:  SGC Antenna Tuner and/or whip
Date: 4 Sep 1996 06:04:26 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 3
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50jk7a$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

I would like to buy a recent model SGC Antenna Tuner and/or the SGC whip.

Please email me with price, age, condition:  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:16 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-9.sprintlink.net!rain.fr!jussieu.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GAP  Titan vs Dipole; relative merit
Date: 4 Sep 1996 22:53:24 -0700
Organization: Zippo
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <50lpsk$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <50j4jo$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hh1100114.direcpc.com

>I would advise anyone contemplating buying a $200-500 all-band vertical
>to try a $40 ladder-line fed dipole first.
>
>73, Cecil, W6RCA
>

 I owned, and still own, the dipole you tout, Cecil, because it works.

I was seeking a low angle "dx" antenna that would fit on a postage stamp
size lot with a house, woodpile, 3 small sailboats and an old van used
as a shed. Needless to say, there is not much left on a 100' x 50' lot
for exotica that instills fear in the neighbours or requires an extensive
radial system. The GAP Titan filled the bill; so I thought.

 If, in fact, it had the low angle radiation characteristics of a simple
ground mounted vertical with a good radial system, it would have whipped
my dipole on the long haul. It fails, miserably on all bands but 40m. It
is quite obvious, now, that it is no substitute for real estate. It has
little relative merit for my purposes, but had it worked as touted by
testimonials and advertising literature, I would have achieved Nirvana.

 PS. I use K6STI's AO for antenna analysis, and I am quite pleased with it.
Had I modelled the Titan, would I have saved a $289 lesson in what appears
to me as adverising "puffery"? Has anyone else of this group modelled the
GAP products? I notice on this newsgroup, very little reference to AO. Is
there a significant difference between W7EL's and K6STI's software?

                           Pete/wa4hei




From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:17 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.nkn.net!news4.agis.net!agis!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!lou.teclink.net!usenet
From: "Tom C. Brown, Jr." <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: R7-Hi SWR except for 40m
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 12:28:20 -0500
Organization: Madison Materials Company
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <50k1k1$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: tc1_22.teclink.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; U)
To: Jeff Corey <[e-mail]>

Jeff Corey wrote:
>
> I have just installed a Cushcraft R7 on a 3ft tripod, roof mounted.  I used
a
> 5' section of radio trash steel mast on the tripod.  Everything measures out
> on the ground in terms of dimensions, and I am feeding it with 100' of RG58/
U.
>
> It hears fantastic, and load up fine on 40m with a 1.2 SWR.  All other bands
> the SWR is so HI that the Kenwood TS-440S antenna tuner wont tune it.  I do
> have a MFJ tuner I am going to install in a day or so, but my thoughts are
> that it should run "out of the box" with the SWR claimed on the instructions
.
>
> Any suggestions on how to troubleshoot it?
>
> 73  de
>
> Jeff Corey
> WB9KAZ



Hi Jeff-

My first thought would be that some of the traps are out of place.

The fact that you have a good match on 40 meters implies that the
overall length is right, and that none of the traps are open, and that
the matching network is OK.

If that is all true, then the next clue is that 10 meters doesn't
match.  Theoretically, if all the stuff above is indeed OK, and if 10
meters does not match, then the 10 meter trap (the bottom one) would be
the first thing to look at. I would think that 10 meters would at least
be within shouting distance of correct even with problems up higher on
the radiator.

Might be real interesting to take a look up this thing with an impedance
bridge or SWR analyzer of some sort.

I have had an R7 up for three years and it works like a charm.  Gives a
fine match where it is supposed to, and radiates just fine.  It's a fine
DX antenna.

Let me know how it goes.

73 and GL

Tom KJ5IE


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:18 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!woodybbs!666!12:320/100!9!1:2619/211!charles
From: Charles%1:2619/211.9%12:320/100.666 (Charles%1:2619/211.9%12:320/100.666)
Date: 04 Sep 96 10:20:22
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: R7-Hi SWR except for 40m
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: WoodyWare Software, Inc.
Lines: 40

From: [e-mail] (Charles)
Subject: Re: R7-Hi SWR except for 40m
Organization: United States Internet, Inc.

In article <50k1k1$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jeff Corey) wrote:

> I have just installed a Cushcraft R7 on a 3ft tripod, roof mounted.  I used
a

> 5' section of radio trash steel mast on the tripod.  Everything measures out

> on the ground in terms of dimensions, and I am feeding it with 100' of
RG58/U.
>
> It hears fantastic, and load up fine on 40m with a 1.2 SWR.  All other bands

> the SWR is so HI that the Kenwood TS-440S antenna tuner wont tune it.  I do
> have a MFJ tuner I am going to install in a day or so, but my thoughts are
> that it should run "out of the box" with the SWR claimed on the instructions
.
>
> Any suggestions on how to troubleshoot it?
>
>
> 73  de
>
> Jeff Corey
> WB9KAZ


Use aome RG8 coax. The RG58 has a lot of loss at that long of a run.


Charls   KD4HHX

 # Origin: Usenet:United States Internet, Inc. (1:2619/211.9)

 # Origin: Gateway ARNet <-> HamNet by HB9EBW (12:320/100.666)
--
|Fidonet:  Charles%1:2619/211.9%12:320/100.666 2:301/249.666
|Internet: Charles%1:2619/211.9%12:320/100.666
|
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:19 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.nevada.edu!news.tamu.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.ti.com!usenet
From: Joe Fitter BV/N0IAT <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: R7-Hi SWR except for 40m
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 1996 15:20:11 -0700
Organization: Texas Instruments Asia, Taiwan ROC
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: na01872244.taiwan.ti.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win16; I)
CC: [e-mail]

Someone wrote:
>> I have just installed a Cushcraft R7 on a 3ft tripod, roof mounted.
>> used a 5' section of radio trash steel mast on the tripod.  Everything
>> measures out
>> on the ground in terms of dimensions, and I am feeding it with 100' of
>> RG58/U.
>> Any suggestions on how to troubleshoot it?
>> Jeff Corey
>> WB9KAZ
> To Which [e-mail] replied:

> Use aome RG8 coax. The RG58 has a lot of loss at that long of a run.
> Charls   KD4HHX

I dont get it -- according to several books, RG-58A/U is actually
better for outdoor use than old RG-8 at HF frequencies at lengths of 150
feet or less.   The loss difference, the books claim, is negligible at HF
frequencies, below 30 Mhz...and the RG-58 A/U contains some
stabilizing element in the outter jacket which prevents UV
contamination (something that many RG-8 cables dont contain).

Why so many posts on RG-8 being better than RG-58A/U?   Sure,
if you run an amplifier it's another story, or on VHF/UHF,  but a
barefoot 100 watt HF rig and a semi-resonant antenna should be no problem
and one can not even hear the .5 or what-ever DB loss difference between
the two types of cables.

I'm an RG-58A/U user (ok, occasionally RG-8X too) and find it
loads easier to hide, handle, and even to attach PL-259's to.
(the inner reducer helps keep heat away from the plastic coax
cover -- a "feature" not available on standard amphenol pl-259's
when used with RG-8.

What am I missing here -- is this a myth like the woufhong?
Joe

----------------------------------------------------------
Amateur Radio:  BV/N0IAT   Taipei TAIWAN Republic of China

        http://www.isite.net.tw/bv1al/e-hist.htm

ex.  7J1AOF (Japan)  YU3/N0IAT (Slovenia)  KA0ZDH (Novice)
Licensed Radio Amateur since 1986.  Comments are mine only.
----------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:20 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: "DR. DAVE" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Alliance HD-73 parts
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 00:11:36 -0400
Organization: COMPUTER DIAGNOSTICS
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.atlanta-1.ga.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E (Win95; U)

Try CATS ROTORS I don't know the Address But the Phone # is
1-419-352-4465
                        Dave

Dennis Jacobson wrote:
>
> Anyone out there know where I can get parts for the Alliance HD-73
> rotator?  I don't find any listing for Alliance who I assume has sold
> out to another company and was guessing that maybe CD bought them.
>
> I can't confirm this and need to be pointed in the correct direction.
>
> Thanks for any help....
> --
>        73... Dennis N6NG                     Retired:
>        INTERNET: [e-mail]                Just another road kill on
>        AX25: N6NG@KJ6FY.#NORCAL.CA.USA.NOAM  the Information Highway.


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:21 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!holmes.sgate.com!jekyll.sgate.com!donovanf
From: Frank Donovan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Alliance HD-73 parts
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 17:54:27 -0400
Organization: Southgate Internet Host
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jekyll.sgate.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>

Dennis,

The complete stock of Alliance HD-73 and U-110 rotators and parts
(several truck loads!) was recently purchased by Norm's Rotor Service.
You can reach him at 301-874-5885 (M-F 0800-1630) or on the World Wide
Web.

73!
Frank
W3LPL
[e-mail]


On Wed, 4 Sep 1996, Dennis Jacobson wrote:

> Anyone out there know where I can get parts for the Alliance HD-73
> rotator?  I don't find any listing for Alliance who I assume has sold
> out to another company and was guessing that maybe CD bought them.
>
> I can't confirm this and need to be pointed in the correct direction.
>
> Thanks for any help....
> --
>        73... Dennis N6NG                     Retired:



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:22 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!news.acsu.buffalo.edu!news.drenet.dnd.ca!crc-news.doc.ca!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!dg198
From: [e-mail] (Frank Sved)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best antenna for 80m at home?
Date: 5 Sep 1996 11:14:53 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 16
Sender: [e-mail] (Frank Sved)
Message-ID: <50mcnd$[e-mail]>
References: <5045qb$[e-mail]> <507mkp$[e-mail]> <50jp5a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Frank Sved)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet6.carleton.ca





 ====== snip ======

Hi Cecil,

        Thanks for your help.  One question, though, will the ladderline
fed by my balanced feeder, radiate in the shack?  I'd like to keep the rf
outside were it will do some good.

--


  Bye for now, Frank Sved (VE3GID) at [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:23 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!scnews.sc.intel.com!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best antenna for 80m at home?
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 13:33:38 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <5045qb$[e-mail]> <507mkp$[e-mail]> <50jp5a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <50mcnd$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: camoore-desk.ch.intel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

Frank Sved wrote:
> ... will the ladderline fed by my balanced feeder, radiate in the
> shack? I'd like to keep the rf outside were it will do some good.

Hi Frank, if your currents are balanced, neither ladder-line nor
coax will radiate more than a negligible amount. If your currents
are unbalanced, either ladder-line or coax will radiate. The only
difference is conductive objects need to be separated from the
ladder-line by a number of wire-to-wire spacings. According to some
of the experts, a link-coupled tuner tends to balance the currents.
I have my ladder-line coming through a piece of plexiglas that fits
in the bottom of a window.

73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:24 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!oleane!jussieu.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!howland.erols.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!news.acsu.buffalo.edu!news.drenet.dnd.ca!crc-news.doc.ca!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!dg198
From: [e-mail] (Frank Sved)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best antenna for 80m at home?
Date: 6 Sep 1996 12:03:41 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 22
Sender: [e-mail] (Frank Sved)
Message-ID: <50p3ut$[e-mail]>
References: <5045qb$[e-mail]> <507mkp$[e-mail]> <50jp5a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <50mcnd$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Frank Sved)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca


Cecil Moore ([e-mail]) writes:


 ====== snip ======
> difference is conductive objects need to be separated
from the > ladder-line by a number of wire-to-wire spacings. According to
some
> of the experts, a link-coupled tuner tends to balance the currents.
> I have my ladder-line coming through a piece of plexiglas that fits
> in the bottom of a window.
>
> 73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)


Thanks, Cecil, however I was under the impression that you want the ladder
line to radiate under certain conditions at low frequencies and become a
feeder to the legs at higher frequencies.  Is this true.?
--


  Bye for now, Frank Sved (VE3GID) at [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:25 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tir.com!news
From: Robert <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best antenna for 80m at home?
Date: 6 Sep 1996 12:39:59 GMT
Organization: The Internet Ramp
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <50p62v$[e-mail]>
References: <5045qb$[e-mail]> <507mkp$[e-mail]> <50jp5a$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: an4lan.tir.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Frank Sved) wrote:
>
> ([e-mail]) writes:
>
>
> ====== snip ======
>> As you either acclimatize to the low bands, or don't, you
>won't have spent
>> hard earned money foolishly, should you not like the noise on and hard work

>> of 80 and 40.  You will have a lot of fun, your way, with what you couldn't

>> possibly known you would have liked, before you tried simple antennae on th
e
>> other bands as well.
>>
>> Mike @ W5WQN
>>
For 75/80 meters I would suggest a horizonal full wave loop, it is the
beat overall performer that I have used.  It can be built with wire and
coax, nothing else needed.  If you have the room to put it up, give it a
try.  Plans are in any ARRL handbook.

good luck..

rob n4yhd




  Apparently I will get better performance that
>dipole.
>




From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:30 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-5.sprintlink.net!voskovec.radio.cz!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.myriad.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best antenna for 80m at home?
Date: 7 Sep 1996 16:12:08 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 58
Message-ID: <50s6sq$[e-mail]>
References: <5045qb$[e-mail]> <507mkp$[e-mail]> <50jp5a$[e-mail]> <50p62v$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr16s7.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <50p62v$[e-mail]>, Robert <[e-mail]> writes:
>[e-mail] (Frank Sved) wrote:
>>
>> ([e-mail]) writes:
>>
>>> Mike @ W5WQN
>>>
>For 75/80 meters I would suggest a horizonal full wave loop, it is the
>beat overall performer that I have used.  It can be built with wire and
>coax, nothing else needed.  If you have the room to put it up, give it a
>try.  Plans are in any ARRL handbook.
>
>good luck..
>
>rob n4yhd

One day I may get to try one of these creatures!  I've also never actually
plotted one in MN(c).  I can imagine two meanings for "full wave loop" as
you write.  One is a loop whose dimensions total a full wave around the
loop.  The other would be a full wave on each leg of four sides..

Just contemplating the theory, instinct says the first, a full wave around the

horn, might plot out somewhat like two half wave dipoles spaced about a
quarter wave apart?  This, in a way, is like looking at the individual element
s
of a quad and realizing that each loop acts like two stacked elements one
eigth wavelength apart in spacing.  If that is the action going on, then
would you say your experience is that the antenna is slightly directional
in line with the feed point direction?

The other gadget, a full wavelength on a side defies my initial mental ability

to intuitively generate a pattern, what with a current point at each corner an
d
the elements a complete wavelength apart as well.  Bent in, the obvious
configuration cousin is a Rhombic one wavelength on a side, a traveling
wave device...   I kind of know that these are very dependant in take off
angle as to height above ground, although they do have somewhat lower
angles height for height, than an equivalent dipole.

That noted, does the full wave loop in the shorter sense derive a few
degrees lower angle than it's simple dipole comparison device?  Is that,
perhaps, why the antenna has better performance than the dipole, as well
as, perhaps, gain in a certain direction, which if it happens to be a favorabl
e
on, leads hams using them to say they are better antennas?

In any event, I'll guess that higher is better.  I'll alos guess that the same

problem of getting the angle down to a reasonable 12 degrees on 80 for DX
is STILL going to be getting it up to 100 feet or so.  That may be a home
demonstration, but it ain't a free home demonstration for any but someone
with the right sized pine trees or redwoods!

Seems like item number two would be worse, an estate domain, perhaps?

  :)

Ever plotted it out and looked at it?   As noted, I haven't.. just curious.

Mike @ W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:35 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!holmes.sgate.com!jekyll.sgate.com!donovanf
From: Frank Donovan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Grade LE Phenolic Insulator
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 17:50:36 -0400
Organization: Southgate Internet Host
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jekyll.sgate.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>

Hi Forrest,

I've been using phenolic mounting plates for years.  I began using
phenolic after I had problems with stacked Yagis using plumber's delight
(all metal) construction.  In this case, the problem was caused by a 3
element 20M monobander stacked 10 feet over a 3 element 40M monobander.
The 3 element 40M monobander worked perfectly when it was installed, but
after I installed the 20M beam, the VSWR on the 40M beam went very high
and it became nearly omnidirectional!  To make a long story short, the 20M
beam toploaded the 10 foot mast and it had a nice quarter wave resonance
on 40M, and because everything was metal, it was very happy to radiate
power on 40M.  Replacing the three parasitic element mounting plates on
the 20M beam completely eliminated the problem!   Ever since that
experience, I've used phenolic mounting plates to avoid unintended
resonances in my Yagis.  The price is comparable to aluminum plate of the
same strength.

73!
Frank
W3LPL
[e-mail]

On Wed, 4 Sep 1996, FORREST GEHRKE wrote:
>
> Frank,
> Since you are using phenolic mounting plates for your
> Yagi elements, it sounds as though your elements are
> insulated from the boom? Any reason for this?
>
> That phenolic isn't cheap; is aluminum equally priced?
> It's been awhile since I bought any.
>
>   Forrest k2bt



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:37 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!van-bc!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx26-14
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 96 03:04:37 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <50irhu$[e-mail]>
References: <50hsb2$[e-mail]> <50ie20$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx26-14.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <50ie20$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:

>. . .

>There is such little physical difference we can observe, no wonder this is
>only indirectly approached in textbooks. We were all left to our own
>devices to get a feel for what is going on. In the world we live and work
>in, it isn't going to make much difference which physical cause is
>correct....since we can only measure what really goes on in the four ways
>listed above.

>. . .

Each to his own. But I steer clear of any model that's fundamentally
flawed. Sooner or later, it trips you up, predicting results that don't
happen. I suppose that the aether theory was easy to apply and -- almost
always -- predicted the right results. Given my choice, I'll take the
theory that's fundamentally correct, and learn to understand it.

The principles I've been describing have served me very well in my years of
designing very high-speed (to 50 GHz) sampling circuits. Every change in
the current path or field orientation shows up dramatically in a TDR
system. The reality of skin effect was essential in predicting and
controlling the effects of plating on conductors. It was essential to
know where the fields were and what they looked like. And it worked. A
flawed theory would have bitten me sooner or later, even if it seemed to be
adequate for some or even most purposes.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:45 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.cdsnet.net!news.magicnet.net!news.supernet.net!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!news.sgi.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news2.interlog.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-22.sprintlink.net!tmpnews.crd.ge.com!news.crd.ge.com!crd.ge.com!mallick
From: [e-mail] (John Mallick)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: 6 Sep 1996 13:06:03 GMT
Organization: GE Corp. Research And Development
Lines: 61
Sender: mallick@proteus (John Mallick)
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <50p7jr$[e-mail]>
References: <50l1qu$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: proteus.crd.ge.com

In article <[e-mail]>, "William E. Sabin" <sa
[e-mail]> writes:

|> with your concept, as I have said many times:
|>
|> 1) Let's recapitulate. You are trying to explain why an H field appears
|> on the outside of the coax, under the assumption that the H field from
|> the center lead cannot penetrate the shield and make it to the outside.
|> The measured value of the external current, using a clamp-on meter, is
|> very nearly equal to the current in the center lead. If this is true,
|> then the current on the outside of the braid must be equal to that in
|> the center wire.
|>
|> 2) Current I amps, of the same value as that in the center lead, is
|> flowing toward the generator inside the braid. Initially, at least,
|> assume a coax short enough that propagation time can be neglected.

The H field is driven not only by I but also by dD/dt (time rate change of
electric displacement).   You need to consider all the sources unless you
can argue they are negligible.  For H close to the coax, this is probably a
good assumption.

|>
|> 3) The voltage at the end of the braid would then have to be *above*
|> ground, either because of resistance or reactance (assumed to be
|> inductive), or both. The generator is at ground. Furthermore, as the
|> length of the coax is increased the value of this voltage would become
|> more positive (the current is constant). Incidentally, if the voltage
|> at the end of the braid is reactive, the current in the braid (inside
|> or outside) cannot be exactly in phase or exactly out of phase with the
|> current in the center lead.
|>
|> 4) Now the same magnitude of current is expected to flow *up hill*
|> against a potential difference on the outside of the braid from the
|> generator to the end of the braid.
|>
|> 5) This cannot happen. Current cannot flow *up hill* against a
|> potential difference like that. We must be clear about that.
|>
|> 6) This is a serious difficulty, I kid you not. How do you reconcile
|> this problem?
|>

Aha!  Potential can only be defined (uniquely) in an electrostatic system,
where there is no time rate change of H.  If you do have a time rate change
of H, then the potential you measure is dependent upon the path used to
define it (the meter leads).  This is what Tom Bruhns was referring to in
his discussion of the validity of KVL and KCL.

73, John WA1HNL

PS...I don't use a balun on my dipoles...

--
.... ..     .... ..     .... ..     .... ..     .... ..     .... ..
John A. Mallick WA1HNL                    E-mail: [e-mail]
GE Corporate Research and Development     Phone: [phone] (W)
Schenectady, NY 12301                     FAX:   [phone] (W)
.... ..     .... ..     .... ..     .... ..     .... ..     .... ..

"Work like hell.  Tell everyone everything you know.  Close a deal
 with a handshake.  And have fun." --- "Doc" Edgerton


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:46 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!metro.atlanta.com!cpk-news-feed3.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-feed2.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!woodybbs!9!1:2619/211!w8ji..tom
From: W8JI..Tom%1:2619/211.9 (W8JI  Tom%1:2619/211.9)
Date: 03 Sep 96 12:22:01
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: WoodyWare Software, Inc.
Lines: 51

To: W8JI  Tom%1:2619/211.9%12:320/100.666
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)

In article <50cdvd$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>
>So how is it that no one can explain how a ferrite bead
>balun prevents current leakage through the supposedly
>ineffectual shield at locations on the line that are not
>covered by the beads?  Or how a 1/4 wave stub at the load,
>which doesn't shield the cable at all, can prevent the
>fields from penetrating the shield, thus forcing equal
>currents on the inner conductors?
>
>

The bead effect can simply be explained by the high common mode impedance
Jack, and the transformer action. Remember the big thread about moving the
balun to the input of the tuner, when I said it would make no difference?
Current flow over around or through the conductor makes no difference in
proving one of these explainations correct.

I explained the 1/4 wl stub also, but this server is slow so it may not
have showed up yet. It simply conducts and equal and opposite current that
cancels radiation, and gives the antenna an equal common mode load placing
it in balance. The beads work with any amount of antenna asymmetry, the
1/4 stub will NOT. It requires a perfectly balanced antenna to be
effective.

The only *real world* effect we can actually "see" between the two
explainations is heating of the shield. If current loops around an
electrically short shield at least several cable diameters long, the
shield will get twice as hot when floated as when depended on to carry
return load current.

I wonder if anyone else can think of a real world difference?

73 Tom

 # Origin: Usenet:America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1:2619/211.9)

 # Origin: Gateway ARNet <-> HamNet by HB9EBW (12:320/100.666)
--
|Fidonet:  W8JI  Tom%1:2619/211.9 2:301/249.666
|Internet: W8JI..Tom%1:2619/211.9
|
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:47 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.fibr.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!news.physics.uiowa.edu!news.uiowa.edu!news
From: "William E. Sabin" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: Sun, 08 Sep 1996 08:13:16 -0700
Organization: none
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <50qpt6$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <50tcd3$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-104.cedar-rapids.lib.ia.us
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; U)

William E. Sabin wrote:
>
> You have synthesized the current loop concept to get the explanation that
> satisfies your misunderstanding of how a "conductor" stops an H field. If
> the principles involved are properly understood, this contrived
> explanation is not necessary.
>


A bit of follow-up argument:

Here is a little thought experiment to mull over (please read carefully):

1) Assume that a center lead *current* is increasing at a fairly rapid
and constant rate over some interval of time.

2) Assume that the braid is a *perfect* conductor and is grounded at the
generator.

3) Then a constant voltage V of a fixed polarity will be induced on the
inner surface of the braid.

4) A current, equal to the center lead current, flows on the inner
surface and around the loop back to the ground terminal. So far, so good.

5) Now, let the resistance of the braid be greater than zero (real
world).

6) As the current flows outward on the inner surface there is an IR drop,
say 1 millivolt.

7) As the current returns on the outer surface another 1 millivolt is
lost.

8) We now have a 2 millivolt deficit back at the ground connection.

9) We have a problem here. How do we deal with it?

10) In order to make things come out even the induced voltage would have
to increase by at least 2 millivolts, minimum.

11) But wait a minute. This can't happen. The value of the induced
voltage depends only on the inductance of the braid, not on its
resistance. An increasing current doesn't *induce* a voltage in a
resistance. It only *induces* a voltage in an inductance.

How does the current loop theory deal with this problem? This is the
uphill climb problem that I have mentioned several times.

The correct solution that I have been suggesting does not have this
problem. In fact, when all is said and done, my correct approach doesn't
have *any* problems and doesn't violate any well known basic principles,
once these principles are properly understood.

Bill W0IYH


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:48 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news1.inlink.com!ultra.i1.net!news1.i1.net!Empire.Net!news.frontiernet.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!news.physics.uiowa.edu!news.uiowa.edu!news
From: "William E. Sabin" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: Sun, 08 Sep 1996 08:28:51 -0700
Organization: none
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <50qpt6$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <50tcd3$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-104.cedar-rapids.lib.ia.us
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; U)

William E. Sabin wrote:
>
>
> A bit of follow-up argument:
>
> Here is a little thought experiment to mull over (please read carefully):


A glitch in this argument has occurred to me, darn it. I made a
mistake. Ignore the previous post.


Bill W0IYH


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:48 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!tezcat!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-feed2.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!news.physics.uiowa.edu!news.uiowa.edu!news
From: "William E. Sabin" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: Sun, 08 Sep 1996 14:59:50 -0700
Organization: none
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <50q6ai$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <50v68u$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-111.cedar-rapids.lib.ia.us
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; U)

WB3U wrote:
>
>    "William E. Sabin" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> >My coax article will be in the August QEX in the next week or so.
>
> Bill, will this article promote the "through the shield" theory
> of feedline radiation?
>
> 73,
> Jack  WB3U

No, that subject is not covered.

Bill


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:49 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.mindspring.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: Sun, 08 Sep 96 22:06:04 GMT
Organization: Not Enough
Lines: 26
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <50vgdf$[e-mail]>
References: <50ve2d$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) wrote:

>This has been a most interesting and educational discussion.
>Unfortunately, the time required to participate is taking a
>noticeable toll on both my businesses (software and consulting
>engineering), as well as other activities. I just can't afford
>to continue at this level.

Hi Roy,

I'm in a similar situation.  It's been all I can do to find time
to read everything that's been posted, much less contribute.  At
this point, I'm just barely hanging on.

I hope you will continue to post your expert opinions whenever
you see the need.

Bill, I'm not sure whether you're staying in, but I will also
say thanks for your effort in all this.  While I still disagree
with the basic premise you've presented, it certainly caused me
to re-examine my beliefs.  This entire discussion has been a
great deal of fun, thanks in no small part to your expert and
considered input.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:50 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-8.sprintlink.net!news.fast.net!netaxs.com!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: Sun, 08 Sep 96 20:34:20 GMT
Organization: Not Enough
Lines: 41
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <50vb1e$[e-mail]>
References: <50qpt6$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <50tcd3$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   "William E. Sabin" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>1) Consider the length of braid with an induced voltage on the
>inner surface and the braid grounded at the generator. Let the
>braid have *zero* resistance. The current is limited by the
>reactance of the braid.  The voltage across the braid at the
>generator end is zero.

The voltage across the braid is unlikely to *ever* be zero at
the generator (or more properly, within a few inches of the
generator - there must be sufficient length of concentric
shielding for the inner surface voltage/current to build).
I will describe just two of the many scenarios in which this
is true.

1.  Take the case where the transmitter is in an RF-proof
container and is well-grounded.  The outer surface of the
feedline is exactly 1/2 wavelength and the line is driving a
standard dipole, without a balun.

  Now, at the feedpoint of the dipole, there is voltage
on the leg connected to the shield.  This voltage causes
current to flow down the outer surface of the shield, towards
the transmitter.  However, due to the difference in velocity
factor between the inside and outside of the coax, the outside
current/voltage is out of phase with the inner current/voltage.
Under these conditions, there is only one point on the outer
surface of the braid at which the voltage across the braid is
zero - the point where the inner and outer surfaces of the
shield are connected together at the dipole.

2. The second case is similar to the above, except the
antenna is driven through a balun.  In this case, there is
voltage/current everywhere within the line, yet the outer
shield is zero (or near-zero).  Again, there is a voltage
differential across the braid everywhere, excepting only
the precise location where the inner and outer shield are
connected together at the load.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:51 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.ksu.ksu.edu!news.physics.uiowa.edu!news.uiowa.edu!news
From: "William E. Sabin" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 22:14:05 -0700
Organization: none
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <50l1t3$[e-mail]> <50l5mq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-117.cedar-rapids.lib.ia.us
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; U)

Anthony Severdia wrote:
>
>
>     Thank you, Bill!  I, too, can't believe how far afield the
> discussion has gone.  Your comments have been very much appreciated
> here but there are many "experts" staying in a fog of own making.

If we weren't doing this kind of stuff, maybe we would all be on 14313
kHz, making a commotion, making noises into the microphones. etc..

Bill


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:52 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!demos!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.ksu.ksu.edu!news.physics.uiowa.edu!news.uiowa.edu!news
From: "William E. Sabin" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 08:39:33 -0700
Organization: none
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <50mgnq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-101.cedar-rapids.lib.ia.us
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; U)

W8JI Tom wrote:
>
>
>
> So much for shielding those small receiving antennas with a Faraday
> shield, eh?
>

Hello, Tom, how are you?

A *true* Faraday shield does not eliminate the E field or the H field.
Its purpose is to prevent *direct* capacitive coupling between two
adjacent circuits. The grounded shield diverts these capacitive currents
to ground. The direct capacitive coupling between two adjacent circuits
can cause spurious effects of one kind or another. That is how it is used
in receivers, transmitters, loop antennas and directional couplers.

References:

1) Terman, Radio Engineering 1955, page 1048

2) Sabin, QEX, May 1995


Bill W0IYH


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:53 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!news.physics.uiowa.edu!news.uiowa.edu!news
From: "William E. Sabin" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 1996 18:52:08 -0700
Organization: none
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <50q6ai$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-110.cedar-rapids.lib.ia.us
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; U)

W8JI Tom wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, "William E. Sabin"
> <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> >Hello,* Tom, how are you?
>
> Hi Bill,
>
> Still holding up, I'm feeling a little fractalized at the moment.
>


I have noticed you and Rick Littlefield (with Communications Quarterly)
conversing. Rick is a nice feller and a good technical guy.

I am completely burned out (really) on this coax thread (I have really
struggled with it) and I have started a new non-internet project that I
think will be interesting. I need to get off-line for awhile.

My coax article will be in the August QEX in the next week or so.

Keep in touch,

Bill W0IYH


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:54 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!news-dc.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: 7 Sep 1996 02:39:40 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 21
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50r5bc$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <[e-mail]>, "William E. Sabin"
<[e-mail]> writes:

>I am completely burned out (really) on this coax thread (I have really
>struggled with it) and I have started a new non-internet project that I
>think will be interesting. I need to get off-line for awhile.
>
>My coax article will be in the August QEX in the next week or so.
>
>

I think we all need to QSY to 14.313 and belch a while. It's been fun,and
hey, I learned something new. That made it all worthwhile.

I can't get a coaxial shield grounded well enough to make it totally
non-radiating with 15 amps in the #10 wire, but I can get about 3-5 dB
reduction in H field. With that change, the shield gets about 1/3 less
temperature rise under the same test time. Too much going on at once for
too small a temperature change to rely on this method.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:55 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsrelay.iastate.edu!news.drake.edu!news.physics.uiowa.edu!news.uiowa.edu!news
From: "William E. Sabin" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 13:43:34 -0700
Organization: none
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <50mgnq$[e-mail]> <50n074$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-105.cedar-rapids.lib.ia.us
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; U)

Phil Hodge wrote:
>
> I want to thank everyone who has posted on this topic.  It really
> has been a very interesting thread, not just for the physics but
> also for the sociology.

Spirited discussions among folks with strong viewpoints are not always
very ladylike, but they often produce worthwhile results.  That
is happening here. Throughout my career I have seen a lot of this and
have been in the middle of it from time to time. Believe me, it's nothing
personal, and the players have no hard feelings about it (nearly always).
Debators always use various strategies to try to win, some of which may
not seem to fit Marquis of Queensbury Rule Books or the sensibilities of
non-involved observers.

Bill W0IYH


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:56 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: 6 Sep 1996 02:39:07 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 11
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50ogub$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <[e-mail]>, "William E. Sabin"
<[e-mail]> writes:

>some of which may
>not seem to fit Marquis of Queensbury Rule Books or the sensibilities of
>non-involved observers.

Actually, sometimes they resemble Marquis de Sade's rules of order, as
painful as it may be. :-)

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:57 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.asu.edu!atkes
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: 5 Sep 1996 23:14:09 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <50nms1$[e-mail]>
References: <50l1qu$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: general4.asu.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

William E. Sabin ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Roy Lewallen wrote:
: Your last paragraph illustrates exactly and precisely what is wrong
: with your concept, as I have said many times:

: 1) Let's recapitulate. You are trying to explain why an H field appears
: on the outside of the coax, under the assumption that the H field from
: the center lead cannot penetrate the shield and make it to the outside.
: The measured value of the external current, using a clamp-on meter, is
: very nearly equal to the current in the center lead. If this is true,
: then the current on the outside of the braid must be equal to that in
: the center wire.

: 2) Current I amps, of the same value as that in the center lead, is
: flowing toward the generator inside the braid. Initially, at least,
: assume a coax short enough that propagation time can be neglected.

: 3) The voltage at the end of the braid would then have to be *above*
: ground, either because of resistance or reactance (assumed to be
: inductive), or both. The generator is at ground. Furthermore, as the
: length of the coax is increased the value of this voltage would become
: more positive (the current is constant). Incidentally, if the voltage
: at the end of the braid is reactive, the current in the braid (inside
: or outside) cannot be exactly in phase or exactly out of phase with the
: current in the center lead.

: 4) Now the same magnitude of current is expected to flow *up hill*
: against a potential difference on the outside of the braid from the
: generator to the end of the braid.

: 5) This cannot happen. Current cannot flow *up hill* against a
: potential difference like that. We must be clear about that.

: 6) This is a serious difficulty, I kid you not. How do you reconcile
: this problem?

: I have mentioned this many times, and it keeps being ignored. That
: really explains my loss of patience. Can we finally deal with it? I
: would like to ask you to think carefully about this.

Wire up two transformers back to back, like 110 volts to 12 volts
connected to another with 12 volts to 110 volts to a resistive load.
Now measure the voltage across the 12 volt windings. When it is
positive the current is flowing *up hill* out of one winding and *down
hill* into the other. Of course the electric field along the wire is
always very small since it is a good conductor and the current in the
wires in both transformers is in the direction of this very small electric
field. So no one is really flowing up hill. The electrons are being
moved in the direction given by the Lorentz force law, i.e. they are
pushed by the small electric field that remains because the wire
is not a perfect conductor, and retarded by collisions with impurities
etc. in the wire.

73 Kevin [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:58 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!01-newsfeed.univie.ac.at!02-newsfeed.univie.ac.at!newsfeed.uk.ibm.net!news-m01.ny.us.ibm.net!news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Dan Finn)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Help building attic antenna(s)
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 03:45:08 GMT
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <50liij$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <50lhsc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip129-37-240-142.nc.us.ibm.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Dan Finn) wrote:



>The 40m looked liked this:

>                   / \     /\       /\    /\
>               o/     \ /    \ * /    \/    \+


CORRECTION for 40m attic dipole that I used:
:
                                      * <-  feedpoint
                        /\         /\        /\
                      /    \     /    \    /    \
                  o/        \ /        \/        \+

                      side view

                                                      |
                                                      |
                  |---------------- *-----------------|
                  |
                  |
                            Top View


73

KR4AJ







From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:31:59 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!metro.atlanta.com!cpk-news-feed3.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (K1BQT)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS-- RIGHT to PUBLISH
Date: 5 Sep 1996 19:51:09 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 20
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50np1d$[e-mail]>
References: <50nj3k$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (K1BQT)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hi Chip--

Pardon my intervention at this juncture, but I--for one--would love to
have a practical 150 MHz sample of a fractal antenna I could test against
(a.) EZ-NEC gain claims and (b.) a true-to-life on-site reference dipole.
For me, this is where the leather hits the road--and where all of the rest
becomes synthetic reality and a dizzying crossfire of techno-prattle (this
means you too, Tom). If you can provide the antenna or the description of
how to make it, I will gladly run field-strength tests.  If my data or
methodology proves questionable, others may then correct my errors and
follow through with more accurate data.  However, with all due respect to
Roy, there are opportunities for parasitic inaccuracies in any simulation
program--due to the foibles of the model or the user.  As I lift the
sesame-speckled lid of this particular hamburger, I am impressed with the
rich odor of promise and controversy--but simultaneously at a complete
loss to explain the lack of beef.  I don't want industrial secrets,  I
just want something (beside my wandering thoughts or unmentionalble body
parts) that I can hang onto.

Rick--K1BQT


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:00 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!arther.castle.net!news.netrail.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx10-07
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS-- RIGHT to PUBLISH
Date: Sat, 07 Sep 96 01:04:24 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <50qhkf$[e-mail]>
References: <50nj3k$[e-mail]> <50np1d$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx10-07.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <50np1d$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (K1BQT) wrote:
>. . .

>However, with all due respect to
>Roy, there are opportunities for parasitic inaccuracies in any simulation
>program--due to the foibles of the model or the user. . .

I absolutely agree with your statement.

As a person who has spent, and continues to spend, a great deal of his
career using and depending on models, no one knows better than I about the
inherent limitations of their use. (See, for example, "MININEC: The Other
Edge of the Sword", QST, Feb. 1991, or come hear my talk on antenna
modeling at Pacificon in Concord, CA on Oct. 19.) ALL models have their
limitations and, as you say, all are limited by the abilities of their
users.

But . . . If you want to go to an island, heading out into the ocean on a
boat without preparation or any knowledge of the ocean or boat is a mighty
dangerous thing to do. But with preparation and knowledge, the boat can be
a useful, effective, and quite safe way to get there -- provided that you
know the boat's limitations and don't exceed them.

73,
Roy, W7EL


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:01 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (K1BQT)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS-- RIGHT to PUBLISH
Date: 7 Sep 1996 10:03:44 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 11
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50rvc0$[e-mail]>
References: <50qhkf$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (K1BQT)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hi Roy--

Couldn't agree more!  I do, however, see a trend in some papers and
articles of a shifting reality base--away from the salt air and sharp
rocks of the real world--to the comfort of the den and the soft glow of
the pc.  With so many wonderful tools available (yours being  among the
very best), I'd like to see more information and low-cost test equipment
available to help people VERIFY the designs they are cooking up in an
accurate and meaningful way.  "I then built it and it worked within
1/2-S-unit of my TH-6" probably doesn't cut it as a valid technological
statement.


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:02 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.cdsnet.net!news.magicnet.net!news.iag.net!news.sgi.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (K1BQT)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS-- RIGHT to PUBLISH
Date: 9 Sep 1996 19:04:35 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 15
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <5127q3$[e-mail]>
References: <511g24$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (K1BQT)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hi Rick--

Interesting idea.  Discriminating below 1 dB is difficult, since 1 dB was
originally defined as the threashold of discernible difference between
audible signals (for humans).  This was then translated into a power or
voltage ratio so it could be measured using common test equipment.  The
only real problem I can see with your approach is that two antennas cannot
occupy the same space at the same time.  If you are doing range testing at
VHF, I believe the antennas must be similarly positioned in order to yield
accurate results from the common signal source (same mast, same height,
same or equivalent feedline, etc,) Otherwise uncontrolled variable sneak
in and positioning anomolies result.  This means swapping antennas and
doing multiple tirals.

Rick -- K1BQT


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:03 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!panix!news.columbia.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!howland.erols.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sgi.com!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS-- RIGHT to PUBLISH
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 96 05:27:57 GMT
Organization: Not Enough
Lines: 28
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <512umh$[e-mail]>
References: <50qhkf$[e-mail]> <50rvc0$[e-mail]> <50td35$[e-mail]> <511g24$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Richard Karlquist) wrote:

>The high end audio people say you can hear .2 dB difference
>in level.  I don't know about that, but you can certainly
>hear a dB or two.

For what it's worth, my texts on this subject (most of
which I no longer have) all claimed approximately 3 dB
to be the finest amplitude differentation possible by ear.

Perhaps the claims you mentioned were in regard to frequency
response changes between two otherwise identical sources,
rather than overall amplitude?  There's a significant
difference in the way the brain interprets each phenomenon.

>If I had an infinite amount of resources, I would get two
>receivers of the same make/model, gang the tuning together,
>and feed the audio out of the receivers to the left and right
>earphones of a stereo headset.

I agree completely with this approach.  In my experience,
the directional effect of a change in amplitude at one
channel is much more perceptible than an equivalent change
in the total volume.  I suspect something on the order of
1 dB could be detected this way.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:04 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!demos!news1.relcom.ru!EU.net!howland.erols.net!usc!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!news.dtc.hp.com!hpscit.sc.hp.com!rkarlqu
From: [e-mail] (Richard Karlquist)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS-- RIGHT to PUBLISH
Date: 10 Sep 1996 16:38:23 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <5145hv$[e-mail]>
References: <50qhkf$[e-mail]> <50td35$[e-mail]> <511g24$[e-mail]> <512umh$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mentor23.scd.hp.com

In article <512umh$[e-mail]>,
WB3U <[e-mail]> wrote:
>   [e-mail] (Richard Karlquist) wrote:
>
>>The high end audio people say you can hear .2 dB difference
>>in level.  I don't know about that, but you can certainly
>>hear a dB or two.
>
>For what it's worth, my texts on this subject (most of
>which I no longer have) all claimed approximately 3 dB
>to be the finest amplitude differentation possible by ear.
>
>Perhaps the claims you mentioned were in regard to frequency
>response changes between two otherwise identical sources,
>rather than overall amplitude?  There's a significant
>difference in the way the brain interprets each phenomenon.

No, they were not talking about frequency response changes.

This information came from the audio newsgroups such as
rec.audio.tech and rec.audio.high-end.  There is a continuing
debate in the audio community about the methodology of doing
blind A/B tests to determine (for example) whether you can hear
the difference between cheap speaker cable ("zip cord") and
expensive speaker cable ("Monster cable").  One of the issues
that comes up is the following scenario:  suppose the speaker
cables are fairly long so that there is a fraction of a dB.
loss in the cheap ones.  Whether or not you belong to the
church of Monster, you must agree that it is less lossy, simply
due to being of heavier gauge.  Suppose the cheap cable in fact
sounds the same as the Monster cable, just at a slightly lower
amplitude.  A person with an A/B switch would tend to prefer
the Monster cable because it sounds "better."  He is actually
being fooled by the fact that it sounds "louder".  Anyway, the
audio experts say you need to match the amplitude within .2 dB
or so to avoid this effect.

On my stereo, I have a remote control that increments left/right
balance in 1 dB. steps.  A 1 dB. step "moves" the stereo image
about a foot, within the 8 foot spacing between the two speakers.
So I guess that means that a 1 dB. imbalance can be heard (at
least by my ears :-).

Rick Karlquist N6RK
[e-mail]

P.S.:  I connect my $8000 full range electrostatic speakers to
my amplifiers with zip cord from the hardware store.  YMMV!


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:05 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!panix!news1.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (K1BQT)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS-- RIGHT to PUBLISH
Date: 10 Sep 1996 09:24:45 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 11
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <513q6t$[e-mail]>
References: <512vrg$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (K1BQT)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hi Jack--

Concerning my statement on the threshold of discernable difference being 1
dB--I used to be a CAI courseware developer for Cooper and Associates, a
company producing a line of training materials called Teleturor for the
telecommunications industry.  The 1-dB figure was a content item in the
"historical interest" section of one of their courses on telephone line
level mesurement.  It may have had a frequency attached to it (like
1-kHz), but I don't recall for sure.

-- Rick


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:08 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS-- RIGHT to PUBLISH
Date: 6 Sep 1996 02:39:56 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 23
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50ogvs$[e-mail]>
References: <50nj3k$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Chip,

In article <50nj3k$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Fractenna) writes:

>Your obsession has attempted to give readers of this newsgroup an
>aboslutely incorrect view. LIES is more accurate.

You must be taking this as a personal attack. I'm only questioning claims
and theories, not your value as a human. I've offended you without
realizing it, and I'm very sorry to have done that. I appologize. I now
understand fractals are very special to you. I'm sorry I've upset you. I
might  continue to discuss this with others, so if you get upset by my
questions or analysis you should probably avoid reading my posts.

A very necessary part of science is accepting and answering critical
questions in a professional manner. If you have logical technical
responses to any of my statements or questions, then I would enjoy hearing
those comments. If you see a particular area where I have made a mistake,
please point out the error (but only if you also tell me the reason why it
is an error).

73, Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:08 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.inc.net!newspump.sol.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (THamm40820)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Opinions needed on Kanga SuperTuner
Date: 4 Sep 1996 19:57:44 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 14
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50l51o$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (THamm40820)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hi,
  I'm considering purchasing the Kanga SuperTuner.  I would like to know
several things.
  1)  How difficult is the assembly?  I'm a pretty experienced kit
builder, but this one looks like it may be a little complex.
  2)  How well does it work?  Is it usable on 160 meters?
  3)  Refering to the circuit itself, why don't the 4.7K resistors bleed
off some of the RF at the output?
  I would appreciate any comments you have about any aspect of Kanga and
the tuner.
  Thanks !!!

Tommy
KI7KH


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:09 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.i2020.net!root
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Roof mounted loop (Was: Help building attic antenna(s))
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 20:03:53 -0700
Organization: i2020. Richmond's Internet Partner [phone]
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: onramp4-18.i2020.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I; 16bit)

> I'd like to build a multiband/multiwire inverted V up in my attic for
> 40m, 15m & 10m (part of the novice/tech HF bands) consisting of 3 half
> wave dipoles of 66 ft., 33 ft., and 16.5 ft. respectively. But I have a
> few questions. And yes I am new to HF.

Thanks to all for the suggestions. One other thought I had today while
at work is to tack a large "loop" to the outside of my roof on the back
of the house, so it would not be visable from the street. The surface of
the roof is about 40' by 30', so that would give me about a 140' loop
(think of it as a single element quad, slightly tilted), enough to
resonate on 80 meters. Has anyone tried something like this? Does it
sound feasable? I think maybe i'll try both and see what happens.

Cheers,
Steven S. Spiroff N2TQZ/4


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:10 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.scott.net!acara.snsnet.net!news5.crl.com!nntp.crl.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: [e-mail] (Ken White)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Copper Cactus
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 00:56:25 GMT
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <50fvl6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 40.tampa-1.fl.dial-access.att.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Need help finding plans for building the 2M antenna called the "Copper
Cactus". I built one some time ago using plans I'd downloaded from an
FTP site somewhere but can't for the life of me, remember where. It
used 1/2 inch copper pipe, was simple to build and works like a charm.
It may have come from a site in Buffalo.
Any thoughts? Thanks, KE4WIS



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:11 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!ix.netcom.com!news
From: KD1YV <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: W. CT Hamfest close to NYS, 15-Sep, Newtown CT
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 20:51:05 -0300
Organization: Hamily !
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dby-ct3-47.ix.netcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-NETCOM-Date: Wed Sep 04  5:52:26 PM PDT 1996
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win16; I)
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24028 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:32159

THE WESTERN CONNECTICUT HAMFEST
Sponsored by the Candlewood Amateur Radio Association

Just 14 miles from the NY/CT State line!
Sunday, Sept. 15, 1996                      0900-1400
Edmond Town Hall                 Route 6, Newtown, CT
Tables inside                      Tailgating outside
ARRL Sanctioned                    Handicapped Access
Door Prizes                             Ample Parking
Gourmet Fare                            Rain or shine

Talk-in 147.12/.72 PL 141.3

General admission $4.00 at the door (what a deal!)

Tailgating $6.00, inside table reservations $10.00 each, (both
include 1 admission), mail to:
Candlewood Amateur Radio Association, PO BOX 3441, Danbury CT 06813

For more info, phone [phone] or [phone].

Hope to see you all there.
73 de KD1YV
Jim


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:12 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.shadow.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (cRiTTa66)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: copperweld sources?
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 02:58:51 GMT
Organization: Shadow Information Services, Inc.
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-mia-14.shadow.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227

coperweld IS coper coated steel

On 1 Sep 96 21:33:36 -0500, [e-mail] (KTB) wrote:

>Am looking for a source of copperweld wire, hopefully in Ontario.  Have
>not had much success on the web, as yet.  In addition, the wire which
>is used by MIG welders is copper coated steel.  Has anyone used this
>material for antenna construction?
>Ken



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:13 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.erols.net!news2.digex.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Barry Anderson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: copperweld sources?
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 14:38:42 -0400
Organization: Anderson Desktop Publishing
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dcc02685.slip.digex.net
X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v1.00 (30 Day Trial)

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] says...
> coperweld IS coper coated steel
>
> On 1 Sep 96 21:33:36 -0500, [e-mail]
(KTB) wrote:
>
> >Am looking for a source of copperweld wire, hopefully in
Ontario.  Have
> >not had much success on the web, as yet.  In addition, the
wire which
> >is used by MIG welders is copper coated steel.  Has anyone
used this
> >material for antenna construction?
> >Ken
>
Ken ...

   Go to your local farm goods dealer and get some electric
fence wire. This is copperweld wire. It's the cheapest place
to get it, also...


--
Barry Anderson K3SUI
Frederick, MD. 21702
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:14 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!woodybbs!106-4267!chris.boone
From: [e-mail] (Chris Boone)
Date: 04 Sep 96 12:29:45
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 6-meter mobile antennas
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-FTN-To: Raymond A. Brown
Organization: WoodyWare Software, Inc.
Lines: 33

5*** Quoting Raymond A. Brown to All dated 08-17-96 ***
> From: [e-mail] (Raymond A. Brown)
> Subject: Re: 6-meter mobile antennas
>
> NR3O, Chris Smith ([e-mail]) wrote:
> : I found my Hustler 2 meter 5/8-wave mag mount resonant on 6.
>
>   I've heard that most of the 2m antennas _do_ work on 6m, but with 0
> gain (as opposed to the 3dB gain on the 2m itself).
>
Well, thats because on 6mtr, its NO longer a 5/8wave but a
1/4wave....therefore no gain...the coil on a 5/8wave 2m antenna makes it "LOOK
"
3/4 electrically and therefore a match to 50ohms...(1/4wave is a 50 ohm antenn
a
and adding a 1/2 wave to it in electrical length reflects the 50ohm
match....this is true of ANY impedance antenna or line)

I have always run a 2m Larsen on 6 with great results...and its always best NO
T
to cut the element except trim it on 6mtrs ...then accept what the SWR on 2
will be....

73
Chris
WB5ITT

(BTW I run a 2mtr 1/4wave on 440 and its works ok in town...not as good gain
but it works!)

--
|Fidonet:  Chris Boone 1:106/4267
|Internet: [e-mail]
|
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:15 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!metro.atlanta.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!woodybbs!1:106/4267!chris.boone
From: Chris.Boone%1:106/4267 (Chris Boone%1:106/4267)
Date: 04 Sep 96 12:29:45
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 6-meter mobile antennas
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-FTN-To: Raymond A. Brown
Organization: WoodyWare Software, Inc.
Lines: 38

To: Chris Boone%1:106/4267%12:320/100.666
5*** Quoting Raymond A. Brown to All dated 08-17-96 ***
> From: [e-mail] (Raymond A. Brown)
> Subject: Re: 6-meter mobile antennas
>
> NR3O, Chris Smith ([e-mail]) wrote:
> : I found my Hustler 2 meter 5/8-wave mag mount resonant on 6.
>
>   I've heard that most of the 2m antennas _do_ work on 6m, but with 0
> gain (as opposed to the 3dB gain on the 2m itself).
>
Well, thats because on 6mtr, its NO longer a 5/8wave but a
1/4wave....therefore no gain...the coil on a 5/8wave 2m antenna makes it "LOOK
"
3/4 electrically and therefore a match to 50ohms...(1/4wave is a 50 ohm antenn
a
and adding a 1/2 wave to it in electrical length reflects the 50ohm
match....this is true of ANY impedance antenna or line)

I have always run a 2m Larsen on 6 with great results...and its always best NO
T
to cut the element except trim it on 6mtrs ...then accept what the SWR on 2
will be....

73
Chris
WB5ITT

(BTW I run a 2mtr 1/4wave on 440 and its works ok in town...not as good gain
but it works!)


 # Origin: WBBS 409-447-HAMS   Conroe/Houston metro! (1:106/4267)

 # Origin: Gateway ARNet <-> HamNet by HB9EBW (12:320/100.666)
--
|Fidonet:  Chris Boone%1:106/4267 2:301/249.666
|Internet: Chris.Boone%1:106/4267
|
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:16 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!netcom.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mcsun!EU.net!Norway.EU.net!oslonett.no!sn.no!newsfeed.tip.net!thelma.netpower.no!news
From: [e-mail] (Bjoern Stokke)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Question re: Telex  Hygain 7030 uhf antenna
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 1996 16:12:30 GMT
Organization: NetPower Int.
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <50pfbb$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp13.netpower.no
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

I have been using the TELEX Hy-Gain 70-30 uhf  (2 x 15 circ.pol)  on
the pacsats since 1992 , running automatic systems - from SAS to WISP.

The 70-30 antenna has performed very well indeed, and has survived the

(coastal) environment  here  in good mechanical shape.

The assembling was done exactly as described in the "Instruction
Manual" .
In doing so , I found that the details given on page 7 (figure 5) in
my case ended up with LHCP being the "default"  (unswitched) mode.

However,  given the fact that 70 - 80 % of the pacsats
(AO-16,LO-19,UO-22,KO-23,KO-25)  are RHCP  , I  do want to change the
"default" mode  to RHCP.

Details on this subject are given on page 8 (figure 7 ), but I find it
rather difficult  to understand, and follow the  advise given there.

Before digging into the literature and adapting theories into
practice,here finally (!) to my question  : Has anyone done this, or
are there any available hints to clear this matter ?

Thanks for reading this message!

Bjoern, LA5ZL

(temporary qrt on pacsats due to rotor maintenance )





From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:17 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!netcom.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.kei.com!news.thenet.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news-m01.ny.us.ibm.net!news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Felipe)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: EZNEC ELNEC?
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 1996 15:13:55 GMT
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <50pil8$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: 166.72.36.155
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Hi,


Can anyone send me a copy of EZ or ELNEC, if not, know where I can
find it?

Thanks,

felipe

[e-mail]





From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:18 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-ana-7.sprintlink.net!tezcat!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!news.sgi.com!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpbs2500.boi.hp.com!hpax!jholly
From: [e-mail] (Jim Hollenback)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: EZNEC ELNEC?
Date: 6 Sep 1996 20:11:28 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard Cupertino Site
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <50q0hg$[e-mail]>
References: <50pil8$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpwsmjh1.cup.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2.2]

Cecil Moore ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Felipe wrote:
: > Can anyone send me a copy of EZ or ELNEC, if not, know where I can
: > find it?

: Hi Felipe, it is not freeware or shareware but is well worth the price
: from: Roy Lewallen, W7EL, P.O.Box 6658, Beaverton, OR 97007

Or [e-mail]

73, Jim, WA6SDM




From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:19 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.telalink.net!telalink!news.wildstar.net!news.sdsmt.edu!news.mid.net!mr.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-feed2.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.cloud9.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Ham Radio as an *ENJOYABLE*  Hobby
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 1996 11:39:10 -0400
Organization: Cloud 9 Internet, White Plains, NY, USA
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mpenner.dialup.cloud9.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Macintosh; I; 68K)

The QSY Society, a new Amateur Radio Organization for the Putnam,
Dutchess and Westchester area will hold its first meeting on Wednesday,
September 11, 1996, 7:30 PM, at the Carmel Ambulance Corps Headquarters
on Vink
Drive in Carmel, NY. (Behind the Carmel Firehouse on Route 52)

The primary goal of the group will be to fill an existing void by
providing an enjoyable forum for the discussion of technical, operating
and social topics of interest to radio amateurs.

Join us and share the Amateur Radio Experience.


73......

N2YCR


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:20 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news1.sunbelt.net!mel.hargray.com!pull-feed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!hookup!news.nstn.ca!coranto.ucs.mun.ca!news.unb.ca!scratchy.mis.ca!Default
From: [e-mail] (pegasus1)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: DMX tower sections for sale
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 96 17:45:45 GMT
Organization: MIS Saint John
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <50po09$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ts2-sj-24.mis.ca
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

To anyone who may be interested, I have obtained some tower pieces (not
used)that I will sell at below cost (CDN pricing). If anything takes your
interest please Email me, the list is not long and is as follows:

Delhi self-supporting DMX tower sections

DMX-104     1 section   50.00 ea
DMX-105     2 sections  50.00 ea
DMX-107     3 sections  60.00 ea
DMX-108     1 section   70.00 ea
CBS-5 legs  3 sets      10.00 ea

Delhi tubular 16ga GN tower supplies

GNBP (tower base plates)  5 pieces  7.00
GNHB (house bracket)      1 piece   7.00

4 foot ground rod with grounding lug  @ 3.00 ea  - 4 pieces

Prices are not etched in stone for serious inquiries. Purchaser will be
responsible for shipping & handling charges.

Wayne


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:20 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!tezcat!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!news.esslink.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Paul A. Cianciolo)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Rhombic on vhf?
Date: Sat, 07 Sep 1996 04:17:25 GMT
Organization: ESSLink
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <50qitr$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm1-19.esslink.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Hello all,

I was wondering if anyone has any experience with using a rhombic
antenna on either VHF or UHF bands.  Looks real good on the antenna
modeling programs!!


Thanks

PaulC KB1RP



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:21 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!news.cdsnet.net!news.magicnet.net!news.iag.net!enews.sgi.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.myriad.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Rhombic on vhf?
Date: 9 Sep 1996 08:40:34 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <510l62$[e-mail]>
References: <50touj$[e-mail]> <50uqns$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup512.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <50uqns$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) writes:
>Hi Tony,
>
>In article <50touj$[e-mail]>,
>[e-mail](Anthony Severdia) writes:
>
>Any antenna with a multiple lobe pattern generally makes a poor receiving
>antenna.
>
>73 Tom

Boy are you good with words Tom.  You are SO right...  I wish I had your
ability to be as concise...

Mike @ W5WQN



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:22 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.telalink.net!telalink!news.wildstar.net!imci5!pull-feed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.compuserve.com!news.production.compuserve.com!news
From: Roger Cox <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Rhombic on vhf?
Date: 9 Sep 1996 17:27:43 GMT
Organization: Telex Comm.
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <511k2f$9hv$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>

K0MQS in Iowa acheived the first WAS on 144 MHz while using
stacked rhombics!!  They may not be the best choice, but they do
work.

--
Roger Cox


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:23 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!tezcat!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-feed2.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news2.ixa.net!news.olympus.net!news
From: [e-mail] (O'Hara)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna Analyzers
Date: Sat, 07 Sep 1996 01:12:57 GMT
Organization: Internet for the Olympic Peninsula
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <50qiab$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ptpm016.olympus.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82


Can anyone advise as to the merits of the AEA and MFJ offerings in
this area?  Each offers several models and if I go this route, I'd
like to get the better to best unit the first time, rather than one
that cannot be relied upon for accuracy.

E-mail response is fine.

Thanks in advance, Chuck



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:24 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.net66.com!jolt.pagesat.net!newshub.internex.net!newshub1.internex.net!news.Stanford.EDU!agate!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!news
From: [e-mail] (W6KKT Jesse)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Analyzers
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 1996 14:11:53 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 23
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <50qiab$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dyn24.frazmtn.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/16.227

On Sun, 08 Sep 96 09:59:19 GMT, "Anthony R. Gold"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

>In article <[e-mail]>
>           [e-mail] "Lewis P. Stephens Jr." writes:
>
>> In article <50qiab$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (O'Hara) wrote
:
>>
>> >Can anyone advise as to the merits of the AEA and MFJ offerings in
>> >this area?  Each offers several models and if I go this route, I'd
>> >like to get the better to best unit the first time, rather than one
>> >that cannot be relied upon for accuracy.
>> >
>> >E-mail response is fine.
>> >
>> >Thanks in advance, Chuck
>>
>>
Hi Chuck,  The Autek RF-1 not only will measure Z (impedance) but will
also measure SWR (relative to 50 ohms) and has the added benefit of
measuring capacitor & inductor values.
73, Jesse Touhey, W6KKT



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:25 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.nevada.edu!news.tamu.edu!news.sgi.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.bctel.net!news.mag-net.com!ve7tcp.ampr.org!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Pete Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna Analyzers
Date: 10 Sep 96 10:55:57 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Don't forget the Autek RF-1 - as cheap as the MFJ, measures more parameters
than either, and compact(er)!

73, Pete Smith N4ZR
[e-mail]
... and not changing!



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:26 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!ivy.SHINe.org!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-11.sprintlink.net!demos!news1.relcom.ru!EU.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!usenet
From: F. Kevin Feeney <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Analyzers
Date: 10 Sep 1996 21:07:22 GMT
Organization: Cornell University/NR
Lines: 21
Sender: [e-mail] (Verified)
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <514laa$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ascension.cit.cornell.edu
X-UserAgent: Nuntius v1.1.1d7
X-XXDate: Tue, 10 Sep 96 22:14:05 GMT

In article <[e-mail]> Pete Soper, [e-mail] writes:
>What's really nice with the RF-1 (or MFJ) is to be able to work out
>tuning parameters with new antennas or other equipment while only
>radiating a very tiny amount of power.
>
>Regards,
>Pete
>KS4XG

I've been curious, just how much power do these various tools put out?
And how low does the power have to be before it's not considered an out
of band transmission?

I've also been curious what kind of bridge they use, and how the get
around the diode drop issue at the presumably low power levels they are
running.

Any insights into these questions would be appreciated.

Kevin, WB2EMS    "Let's try sending something besides *lawyers* to
Congress. "


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:26 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.iadfw.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (J. Fred Riley)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Analyzers
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 09:02:33 -0500 (CDT)
Organization: INTERNET AMERICA
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <513so5$[e-mail]>
References: <50qiab$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dal30-15.ppp.iadfw.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.38

[e-mail] (O'Hara) wrote:
>Can anyone advise as to the merits of the Autek

I recommend the Autek highly even though I don't own one.  Every one
I've bought has been left overseas with other engineers who, once
they've seen it, couldn't live without it.  It'd a dandy device and,
because of its lower frequency limit (about 1 MHz), is useful for many
MW broadcast engineers.


FRED

[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:27 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.intersurf.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!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 need photo"
Date: 6 Sep 96 22:43:39 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

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


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:28 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-ana-7.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!news-f.computek.net!news.iadfw.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!minerva.ibernet.es!news.ctv.es!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Angel Alonso)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: AOR DA3000 Discone
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 1996 23:05:27 GMT
Organization: C.T.V.
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ctv2091.ctv.es
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99d/32.182

Hello !!!

This is my first message here. Sorry for my english, I am spanish and
can not manage very well.

I'm looking at getting a discone antenna for my ar8k, and have found
DA3000 is a bit expensive. Is it well worth ??

Thanks in advance.

__________________________________

-- Angel Alonso <[e-mail]>


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:29 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news1.agis.net!ns2.alink.net!news8.agis.net!news.llv.com!bad-news.harborcom.net!news.BSDI.COM!newsfeed.orst.edu!newshub.tc.umn.edu!spool.mu.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.ultranet.com!zombie.ncsc.mil!newsgate.duke.edu!agate!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS
Date: 2 Sep 1996 15:43:32 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 38
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50fdd4$[e-mail]>
References: <50fam5$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Tom, you're still at it and this is getting tiresome. Again, fractal
antennas have been around for a very long time. Why don't you dig out
these references rather than making it my  continued burden to answer
something you can easily look up? Better yet, why don't you talk to the
other researchers doing fractal antenna work--maybe they can answer your
questions at a level of satisfaction.

If you want the fractal antenna biblio, just ask for it; about 15 guys on
the newsgroup have.

As for RadioMatt, I've sent you e-mail but you don't respond. What's your
agenda? Do you represent a competitor?

Do you really think you can SELL a commercial antenna that doesn't work?!
Do you honestly think R&D folks are that naive? That they don't have
network analysers and anechoic chambers? The press release YOU mention is
full of inaccuracies; please go read  the ACTUAL one again (as I requested
to you twice in e-mail).

If you must know, Fractal Antenna Systems, Inc. has two antennas available
at present (which is also something I said to you with e-mail) and 1.9 GHz
PCS is not one of them.  The press release makes no such claim of a 1.9
GHz PCS antenna for sale.

We have PCS antenna prototypes but will not have them in production until
a later date.

We do not sell to the amateur radio market, ergo this press release is of
limited interest to an amateur radio antenna newsgroup. Certainly I didn't
try anything crass (as a commercial entity)  like putting it on this
newsgroup. But since you insisted on 'feeling us out', there it is.

Anyway, I do not feel anyones needs are being met by continuing this topic
so, if you wish to level further criticism I will be mute to it. You know
where to get information; you know how to get ahold of me.

73
Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:31 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS
Date: 5 Sep 1996 03:00:48 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 25
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50ltr0$[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 Tom, I just did a quickie EZNEC model of a 64ft centerfed dipole with
>the ends folded so the antenna is 40ft overall. The fractally folded
model
>showed slightly higher gain than either folding the ends back
horizontally
>with one foot spacing or allowing the ends to hang down vertically.
>
>73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)
>
>
Hi Cecil,

I think you have to be real careful with models of densely folded
antennas, Roy could tell us about that. I remember you ran into something
very unusual with a mobile antenna model.

But let's see if this model makes sense. Where and how did you fractalize
the antenna? How wide and long was the fractal area? What were the gain
estimates? What conductor material and size? What height?

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:32 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!scnews.sc.intel.com!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: OfficeLAN User <"OfficeLAN User"@ccm.fm.intel.com>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 09:58:03 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <50ltr0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: camoore-desk.ch.intel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

W8JI Tom wrote:
> But let's see if this model makes sense. Where and how did you fractalize
> the antenna? How wide and long was the fractal area? What were the gain
> estimates? What conductor material and size? What height?

Hi Tom, It was a quickie pseudo-fractal in a 3'x4' area on each end of
a 33' high, #14, 32' straight wire resonant at 8.7MHz over avg ground.
5.4dBi vs 5.13dBi for drooping ends. Started with a half-triangle for
the second degree fractal. Used a third degree fractal which was 2 wide
by 3 high causing a 4.2x increase in length, 16.8' folded in the 3'x4' area.

Let's see if I understand what you have been saying. Is it, "The shorter
the wire used to achieve resonance, the better and fractals use up
a lot of wire in achieving resonance."?

73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:33 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uwm.edu!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS
Date: 6 Sep 1996 09:05:06 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 55
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50p7i2$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Cecil.

By now you've probably read the post about my model.

In article <[e-mail]>, OfficeLAN User <"OfficeLAN
User"@ccm.fm.intel.com> writes:

>
>Hi Tom, It was a quickie pseudo-fractal in a 3'x4' area on each end of
>a 33' high, #14, 32' straight wire resonant at 8.7MHz over avg ground.
>5.4dBi vs 5.13dBi for drooping ends. Started with a half-triangle for
>the second degree fractal. Used a third degree fractal which was 2 wide
>by 3 high causing a 4.2x increase in length, 16.8' folded in the 3'x4'
area.

OK, but we must understand the fractal acts like a hat at this location,
it almost (but not quite) could be made of a disk or chiken wire. Also
understand dielectric losses are NOT included, while conductor losses are
reduced because of placement at the antenna end.

>Let's see if I understand what you have been saying. Is it, "The shorter
>the wire used to achieve resonance, the better and fractals use up
>a lot of wire in achieving resonance."?

No, I'm say a straight conductor covering the maximum area with capacitive
end loading is the best thing we can do when loading a shortened antenna,
and using a fractal to resonant the antenna via series inductive reactance
is the worse thing we can do.

It's easy to cook the comparisons without intentionally trying, and then
come away with an opinion there is some magic in the "fractal shape". That
was the reason I loaded all antennas at the same point where the loading
did not act like a capacitive termination.

If you want to compare at the end you can, but keep it fair. Use a hat the
same overall perimeter as the fractal was, and add the stub or lumped
component necessary to make up the different between the antenna and the
end hat. Try modeling a 3' x 4' area of wires radiating from the antenna
ends, and making up for any reactance shortfall with a small coil or stub
a foot or two in.

As another example:  I could use a coil and expand the outer end to add a
large amount of terminating capacitance, and claim a coil-actal has some
unique geometrical property that makes it break all the rules..... but in
the final analysis it won't break any rules.

We want maximum uniform current spead across the distance the antenna
occupies. Any folding, bending, or current taper in the element will
decrease FS, especially if the folding moves us away from the goal of
resonance with minimum conductor resistance. Antenna radiation is not
improved by increasing the surface area of the conductor with a fixed
volume of space. If it were we'd all be using helical antennas wound with
#32 wire.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:34 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-ana-7.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (K1BQT)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS
Date: 6 Sep 1996 16:55:09 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 32
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50q33d$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (K1BQT)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

This afternoon, I built a second-iteration Cohen dipole designed for
fundamental operation in the 2-M band (for the shape, see page 59, Summer
'96 Communications Quarterly).  I used a box size of around 2-1/8" to get
it into the 146-MHz band.  Feedpoint inpedance was very low--around 10
Ohms.  I used a 4:1 balun to match it into a 50-Ohm system--VSWR was about
1.5:1 at Fr using this method. The current loop occured at the center--as
predicted by EZNEC.  Total span was about 23" in width and depth about 8".

I mounted the dipole vertically on a plastic pipe--with a plastic arm
extending 36" to the rear to carry the feedline away from the element
before allowing it to drop.  I used a groundplane with 4 drooping radials
as a reference antenna and a calibrated field-strength meter with 1-dBm
meter resolution to measure signal strength.  The signal source was the
W1MNS repeater located about 35 miles distant.

Using identical antenna placement, the reference antenna captured a -79
dBm signal from the repeater, while the Cohen fractal dipole captured a
-78 dBm signal.  Subsequent tests in other antenna positions and using
other repeaters as sources yielded similar results.

While it was clear that the Cohen dipole provided no advantage over a
full-sized 1/2-wave antenna, it was equally clear that the capture
sensitivity of the two antennas matched so closely that it approached the
threashold of my ability to discriminate a difference.  When balun losses
are taken into account, there may have been no difference at all.

Regardless of how fractal antennas stack up in any theoretical sense, it
appears that this particular configuration performs credibly.  If there
are differences, it appears to me that they may be minor.  But, don't take
my word for it--you should be able to replicate this experiement easily.

Rick--K1BQT


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:35 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sgi.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS
Date: 8 Sep 1996 02:41:30 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 57
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50tpqq$[e-mail]>
References: <50r2is$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader


An error occurred while processing your posting.

If the transcript complains about the newsgroup name it is
likely that the client software corrupted the group name
in an attempt to parse the message you were replying to.
Until we fix the PC software your only recourse is to
re-post the message yourself using on-line reader.
Comments regarding this message should be sent to
aol.newsgroups.bugs
   ----- Transcript of session follows -----

Can't send article to the server:
        441 400 Rebuilding history file
(Article not posted.)


   ----- Unsent message follows -----

From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS

In article <[e-mail]>, Cecil Moore
>
>Hi Tom, I never intended to compare fractal loading with a coil or stub,
just
>to other forms of folding wire-only antennas. Could you model the same
setup
>and do linear folding in the same area occupied by the fractal and see
what
>the results are?

I did that. I thought I posted it.

Fractenna: 1.26 dBi #########
Coil loaded Q= 200 (easy to do): 1.44 dBi
Coil loaded Q= 300 (a little more difficult but can still be done in
production): 1.57dBi
Stub loaded: 1.69 dBi ########

>I built a fractal beast and rendered the insulators a moot
>point by using very small diameter, high test fishing line always under
>tension
>from gravity.

You still have insulators there, and I have no idea how much loss they
will add. But even without those losses, Eznec said fracs are the worse.
The only question I raised was why the coil in real life beat the stub,
but Eznec had it a bit the other way.

I postulated it was because all loading coil losses are included in the
load model, but only conductor and radiation losses are included in the
stub model. Perhaps I'll measure a few stubs with the 4191A, and just see
what the losses really are.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:36 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS
Date: 9 Sep 1996 20:09:44 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 44
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <512bk8$[e-mail]>
References: <51138o$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <51138o$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Fractenna) writes:
>                                                      RRad

>      dB
>              Published modelled:      17 Ohms             -0.5 dBdipole
>                 K1BQT results      :      10-13 Ohms       -1 to 0
>dBVert.

It's important to remember feedpoint resistance or impedance IS NOT the
radiation resistance of an antenna, as incorrectly defined above.

Feedpoint resistance includes:

1.) Resistive losses

2.) Impedance transformation in the radiator

Radiation resistance is the total power flowing outward from a sphere
surrounding the antenna divided by the square of current causing the
radiation. If the entire outward power flow is 100 watts and the net
current causing this radiated power is two amperes, radiation resistance
25 ohms. Feedpoint impedance can be anything from almost zero to almost
infinity for any radiation resistance. Feedpoint resistance could only
exactly equal radiation resistance by pure happenstance or great planning.

Proper use of radiation resistance can be found described in any antenna
engineering textbook.

The test Rick made simply proves a slightly bent dipole with a single turn
loading coil most of the way out on each element performs slightly poorer
than than a full size antenna. It took a lot of misused terms (like
radiation resistance) and difficult to understand jargon to lead us to
this point.

We'd be much better off discussing how and why an antenna radiates, how to
clearly make a point, what radiation resistance is, and so on than wasting
time jabbering about something as unspecial as the fact **two antennas
almost the same exact length work almost the same, with the slightly bent
antenna and one turn loaded antenna working slightly poorer**.

Big deal
.
73, Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:38 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS
Date: 10 Sep 1996 10:09:27 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 41
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <513sqn$[e-mail]>
References: <513139$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Cecil,

In article <513139$[e-mail]>, Cecil Moore
<[e-mail]> writes:
>
>Hi Tom, Nope, not saying that. Just for the sake of thinking the un-
>thinkable, I asked that no coils and no stubs be accepted as boundary
>conditions. I explore a lot of piles of horse dung and sometimes find
>a pony.

We are in the correct pile to look for that pony, there's been plenty of
horse dung thrown out!

>Fixed coils and stubs don't work very well in all-band antennas.

Stubs can be virtually lossless as decoupling, and even coils or traps can
be *very* low loss. Manufacturers started or nurtured those rumors to sell
antennas, now those tales are accepted as "fact". We've been led by the
noses to believe a system that replaces a trap with something else becomes
better, no matter how much worse the "new improved system" really is.

>A fractally folded all-band antenna might have some potential for a
>limited space, like an attic.

Or a hope chest!  ;-)

>Theoretically, a fractal can keep the folded wires the greatest mean
>distance apart. The farther apart the folded wires are, the less the
>losses (assuming no coils and no stubs).

This is what I'd like to understand. Why are losses less because the wires
are further apart?  I never did understand what you are driving at with
this comment. Can you explain why having the wires further apart increases
the efficiency?

In a coil, having the wires too far apart or too close together lowers the
Q. In a stub, the same effect occurs. The goal is always minimum
resistance, maximum reactance, and minimum distributed stray shunt
capacitance.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:39 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-ana-24.sprintlink.net!news.sgi.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!fnord.dfw.net!news.pcnet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-4.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 09:45:27 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <513139$[e-mail]> <513sqn$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: djkramer-desk.ch.intel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

W8JI Tom wrote:
> Stubs can be virtually lossless as decoupling, and even coils or traps can
> be *very* low loss. Manufacturers started or nurtured those rumors to sell
> antennas, now those tales are accepted as "fact".

Hi Tom, I can hang a stub on my G5RV to get a perfect match on 75m but it
causes God-awful problems on 40m. My 75m mobile loading coil causes lots
of losses and a severe mismatch on 40m. A stub or coil that works on one
band usually will not work on other bands.

> This is what I'd like to understand. Why are losses less because the wires
> are further apart?  I never did understand what you are driving at with
> this comment. Can you explain why having the wires further apart increases
> the efficiency?

I thought that was obvious. Having the wires as far apart as possible
is an unfolded antenna, the most efficient kind. Having the wires as close
together as possible is very inefficient. Any method that maximizes length
while minimizing closeness is worth investigating. After all, that is what
a perfectly straight antenna does.

73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:40 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!news1.erols.com!news
From: Steve Ickes <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 15:02:37 -0700
Organization: WB3HUZ in Baltimore
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <51138o$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: col-as1s62.erols.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; U)

Could you post a definition of what makes an antenna a fractal antenna.
Using some broader definitions of fractals, it seems it would be
impossible to build a fractal antenna.  Fractals in a broader sense mean
a structure that has the same geometry on all scales.  Applied to an
antenna, the structure would look the same if I looked at the antenna
from 50 feet away or looked at it with a microscope.

Since I don't think anyone in this discussion has been able to alter the
molocular structure of copper wire or aluminum tubing, what's the story??

What determines if an antenna is a fractal antenna??

S


Fractenna wrote:
>
> I had 2 e-mail messsages asking me to look at the latest newsgroup
> postings. As a courtesy to K1BQT, who has taken the time to build and

  <<<snip>>>>


> 73
>
> Chip N1IR
> [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:41 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.mindspring.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS
Date: 5 Sep 1996 04:00:06 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 27
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50m1a6$[e-mail]>
References: <50kvo7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <50kvo7$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
writes:

>>Hi Tom, I don't think my meaning was clear. My statement excluded
>>helicals, coils, caps, stubs, etc. Take a 100ft nothing-but-wire
>>dipole and fold it to 50ft using two dimensions. IMO, a fractal
>>fold will minimize the negative effects of folding given those
>>boundary conditions. That's all I was trying to say.
>>
>>73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)
>
>Hi Cecil,
>
>I wasn't very clear either. :-)
>
>Fractal folding will produce the lowest efficiency of any folding method
I
>know of in that example.

And how did we get from 50% reduction of length to about 30% reduction?

Let's do a worthwhile change where we move into the current carrying area
of the antenna. That's where the difference should show up.

I think Rick Littlefield measured a fractal and a diskpole in the real
world. Maybe he can tell us how that came out.
73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:42 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (K1BQT)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: RE:FRACTAL ANTENNAS
Date: 12 Sep 1996 14:04:03 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 8
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <519jaj$[e-mail]>
References: <517rbf$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (K1BQT)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hi Chip--

Interesting entry.  Don't know what brand it was, but it must have been
good!!

73

--Rick


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:43 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.inc.net!newspump.sol.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!news.physics.uiowa.edu!news.uiowa.edu!news
From: "William E. Sabin" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for dipole
Date: Sat, 07 Sep 1996 01:50:28 -0700
Organization: none
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <50qpt6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-115.cedar-rapids.lib.ia.us
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; U)

Roy Lewallen wrote:
>
>        -- An Interesting Experiment --
>
>
> Here's an experiment which shows the effect of currents flowing on the
> inside and outside of a coax shield when both ends of the shield are open.
> I don't believe that the results can be explained without acknowledging
> that this happens. The experiment can repeated by anyone who can make Q
> measurements at HF. I used a homemade Q measuring setup which, at the
> levels I measured here, has been shown to be good to within a few percent.
>

The capacitive coupling between the center lead and the braid adds some
complexity that is difficult to understand. Also, despite the short
length, the braid does introduce a transmission line complication. It is
a mess to try to understand all of this.

I will spend more time with this, but I am wondering in the meantime if
you would think about my previous question. When one end of the braid is
either floating or grounded, how can the current flow in opposite
directions at the same instant, say at the peak of a sine wave, on the
inside and outside of the same braid? I find this extremely difficult to
rationalize. It is a question that is not going to go away.

It has been argued that the inner braid is somehow like the secondary of
a transformer and that the outer braid is like a complex load impedance
on this secondary and that this explains everything.

This quick and dirty expedient does not fly.

The IR drops on the two surfaces would then be in opposite directions at
each location and would cause a large current to flow *across* the
thickness of the braid (there is no skin effect to prevent this!!). Also,
there is no reason to believe that the two currents would be in phase,
which would aggravate this problem. This explanation of the circulating
current is a bad idea.

Bill W0IYH


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:46 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.inc.net!newspump.sol.net!spool.mu.edu!howland.erols.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx12-19
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: Sun, 08 Sep 96 02:53:33 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <50tcd3$[e-mail]>
References: <50qpt6$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx12-19.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <[e-mail]>,
   "William E. Sabin" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>I will spend more time with this, but I am wondering in the meantime if
>you would think about my previous question. When one end of the braid is
>either floating or grounded, how can the current flow in opposite
>directions at the same instant, say at the peak of a sine wave, on the
>inside and outside of the same braid? I find this extremely difficult to
>rationalize. It is a question that is not going to go away.

Thank you for offering to spend more time with it. We'll all learn from
what you determine. I apologize for not having responded yet to your last
posting -- I needed to spend a little more time with it.

>It has been argued that the inner braid is somehow like the secondary of
>a transformer and that the outer braid is like a complex load impedance
>on this secondary and that this explains everything.
>
>This quick and dirty expedient does not fly.
>
>The IR drops on the two surfaces would then be in opposite directions at
>each location and would cause a large current to flow *across* the
>thickness of the braid (there is no skin effect to prevent this!!). Also,
>there is no reason to believe that the two currents would be in phase,
>which would aggravate this problem. This explanation of the circulating
>current is a bad idea.

Bad idea or not, it has so far successfully explained all experimental
results I've gotten so far.

I maintain that there _is_ skin effect -- there is current flowing on the
conductors, and it concentrates near the surface for all the reasons given
in any electromagnetics. There is no flow of current through the conductor
(again qualifying it by the requirement that the conductor be perfect for
the amount to be exactly zero). Therefore, the inside and outside of the
shield act like two entirely different conductors, connected together at
the ends. (You can make them physically separate by hollowing out the
shield.) Like a transformer secondary, the inside of the shield sources
current, so current flows from the - terminal to the + terminal. Like a
transformer secondary, the IR drop is reversed from what you find with
current flowing through a passive load. It's a source, and its
resistance can be viewed as negative if it helps envision what's
happening. (Although I don't want to get deflected into arguing about
this definition of resistance -- I wouldn't defend it vigorously in any
case.) The outside, like a passive load across the secondary, has current
flow from the + terminal to the minus terminal. The voltage between any
point outside the shield and the point on the inside radially inward from
it is zero -- no current flows through the shield.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:47 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!tezcat!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!math.ohio-state.edu!news.physics.uiowa.edu!news.uiowa.edu!news
From: "William E. Sabin" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re:BALUN necesary for a dipole
Date: Sat, 07 Sep 1996 05:48:43 -0700
Organization: none
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-105.cedar-rapids.lib.ia.us
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; U)

Roy Lewallen wrote:
>
>        -- An Interesting Experiment --
>
>
> Here's an experiment which shows the effect of currents flowing on the
> inside and outside of a coax shield when both ends of the shield are open.
> I don't believe that the results can be explained without acknowledging
> that this happens. The experiment can repeated by anyone who can make Q
> measurements at HF. I used a homemade Q measuring setup which, at the
> levels I measured here, has been shown to be good to within a few percent.
>

The capacitive coupling between the center lead and the braid adds some
complexity that is difficult to understand. Also, despite the short
length, the braid does introduce a transmission line complication. It is
a mess to try to understand all of this.

I will spend more time with this, but I am wondering in the meantime if
you would think about my previous question. When one end of the braid is
either floating or grounded, how can the current flow in opposite
directions at the same instant, say at the peak of a sine wave, on the
inside and outside of the same braid? I find this extremely difficult to
rationalize. It is a question that is not going to go away.

It has been argued that the inner braid is somehow like the secondary of
a transformer and that the outer braid is like a complex load impedance
on this secondary and that this explains everything.

This quick and dirty expedient does not fly.

The IR drops on the two surfaces would then be in opposite directions at
each location and would cause a large current to flow *across* the
thickness of the braid (there is no skin effect to prevent this!!). Also,
there is no reason to believe that the two currents would be in phase,
which would aggravate this problem. This explanation of the circulating
current is a bad idea.

Bill W0IYH


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:48 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!metro.atlanta.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.erols.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!uunet!in2.uu.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!woodybbs!9!1:2619/211!"c.d.sage".
From: "C.D.Sage".%1:2619/211.9 ("C.D.Sage" %1:2619/211.9)
Date: 04 Sep 96 17:58:53
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Toroidal Helical Antenna/Radar ?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: WoodyWare Software, Inc.
Lines: 20

To: "C.D.Sage" %1:2619/211.9%12:320/100.666
From: "C.D.Sage" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Toroidal Helical Antenna/Radar ?
Organization: Sage & Co.

Given the isotropic like radiation pattern of the Contrawound Toroidal
Helical antenna, could it be used to enchance the range of vision in the
present, "look-down, shoot-down," radar systems in military applications?
Thanks in advance,
 C.D.Sage

 # Origin: Usenet:Sage & Co. (1:2619/211.9)

 # Origin: Gateway ARNet <-> HamNet by HB9EBW (12:320/100.666)
--
|Fidonet:  "C.D.Sage" %1:2619/211.9 2:301/249.666
|Internet: "C.D.Sage".%1:2619/211.9
|
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:49 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!metro.atlanta.com!cpk-news-feed3.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!woodybbs!9!1:2619/211!w8ji..tom
From: W8JI..Tom%1:2619/211.9 (W8JI  Tom%1:2619/211.9)
Date: 03 Sep 96 12:22:18
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Beverage -Fractal or Load?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: WoodyWare Software, Inc.
Lines: 66

To: W8JI  Tom%1:2619/211.9%12:320/100.666
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Subject: Re: Beverage -Fractal or Load?
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)

Hi Chip,

Please bear with me, AOL takes DAYS to post to usenets, so there is almost
always a few days lag between when I actually respond and it appears.

In article <50c8ot$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Fractenna) writes:

>Answering W8JI's Beverage Question:
>
>Again, you are asking me to publish on the internet and this I will not
>do, especially since this stuff is proprietary.

If it's such a secret, why write articles recommending or suggesting
amateurs use fractals? Why make claims of superior performance if you are
going to refuse to disclose what the advantages are?

Since directivity is a function of physical length, current taper, and
velocity of propagation in the wire I wonder how you measured these? I can
get very close to optimum values with a 250 ft Beverage with only three
series inductors.

>You've already answered your question. Obviously you're happy with your
>high-quality inductors from the 1920's. Hey, if it works for you keep it!
>As for me I know that 8 inductors does the following:
>
>1) assume each inductor has a 90% reliability per year.
>2) Ergo reliability of the whole antenna being reliable per year is :
>
>0.9 x 0.9 x 0.9 x 0.9 x 0.9 x 0.9 x 0.9 x 0.9 =0.43  which is 43%.

Where on earth did you get the idea an iinductor has 90% reliability? My
ICOM 706 uses almost 150 inductors. My linear uses almost 15! This type of
justification does the "fratal cause" no good at all Chip. I suppose
you'll next tell me the rope used to support the fractal will outlast an
inductor? Chip, when we are dead and buried, and our tombstones are
crumbling, most modern inductors would still be good.

If anyone doubts this, just think about how many inductors you've had to
replace in all the electronic equipment you own....vs how many inductors
are inside.

>Guys, this ends my fractal stuff for now; its too much time and money to
>do this stuff over AOL for long (as much as it is fun).

In other words, the "technical diode" is engaged. Data flows out in public
articles, but questions can only flow in privately. After the answer about
coil reliability I'd sign off too.  :-)  Sorry you can't answer any
questions about these top secret theories.

73 Tom

 # Origin: Usenet:America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1:2619/211.9)

 # Origin: Gateway ARNet <-> HamNet by HB9EBW (12:320/100.666)
--
|Fidonet:  W8JI  Tom%1:2619/211.9 2:301/249.666
|Internet: W8JI..Tom%1:2619/211.9
|
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:50 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.dacom.co.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!usenet.etri.re.kr!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!news.hansol.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!usenet
From: [e-mail](Thomas Wagner)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Beverage -Fractal or Load?
Date: 4 Sep 1996 02:10:32 GMT
Organization: Pipeline
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <50ioeo$[e-mail]>
References: <50hlvq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 38.8.150.5
X-PipeUser: N1MM
X-PipeHub: usa.pipeline.com
X-PipeGCOS: (Thomas Wagner)
X-Newsreader: Pipeline v3.5.0

Tom --

I have been casually following the fractal debate.  It's sort of like
watching
kick-boxing.  Interesting, but one doesn't want to get in the middle of it!


Anyway, your post below again references optimum performance in a 250'
beverage by using inductors.  In a previous post you said it would take
three inductors 1/8 wave apart for 160 meters and 7 for 80.
Could you explain?  This is something many of us could use before winter.

Tom - N1MM

_______________________________________________________________
On Sep 03, 1996 12:22:18 in article <Re: Beverage -Fractal or Load?>,
'[e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)' wrote:


>
>Since directivity is a function of physical length, current taper, and
>velocity of propagation in the wire I wonder how you measured these? I can

>get very close to optimum values with a 250 ft Beverage with only three
>series inductors.


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:51 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!tezcat!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Beverage -Fractal or Load?
Date: 6 Sep 1996 09:10:25 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 26
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50p7s1$[e-mail]>
References: <50ioeo$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <50ioeo$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail](Thomas Wagner) writes:

>Anyway, your post below again references optimum performance in a 250'
>beverage by using inductors.  In a previous post you said it would take
>three inductors 1/8 wave apart for 160 meters and 7 for 80.
>Could you explain?  This is something many of us could use before winter.

>
>Tom - N1MM

If the velocity of prpagation is delayed in the wire, the directivity
increases (within limits). This also raises the surge impedance of the
Beverage, so the termionation impedance will most likely be over 1000
ohms.

As I recall optimum Vp was about .5 freespace.

You can probably model this on Eznec, play with loads and ternination
until you get the best pattern. I did this work in the early 70's when I
was attempting to be the first W8 to work JA through the Loran.

I used ferrite coatings, strings of beads, and thick dielectrics....  but
finally settled on lumped inductors.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:52 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-13.sprintlink.net!mhv.net!news.westnet.com!imci4!pull-feed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.winterlan.com!frii.com!usenet
From: Avatar <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: BALUN Questions
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 1996 22:24:37 -0700
Organization: Front Range Internet, Inc.
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftc-31.ppp.frii.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; U)

I have been following the thread under Is BALUN Necessary. While it is
interesting, it doesn't directly answer the question. In various postings
I have seen references to types of baluns that I haven't read about
before. If the experts can take a few minutes from the other discussion,
you can help me and others understand the published side of the hobby.

I am familiar with the conventional baluns that have filled many pages
over the years, but I have not read an Amateur publication in a decade.
Please explain the differences between the conventional balun and (1) a
current balun, (2) a voltage balun.

I would also like to read more about using baluns as feedline chokes for
common mode noise (low noise reception ala W8JI).

Looking forward to learning more about my favorite subject... W0MAY



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:53 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx03-50
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN Questions
Date: Sat, 07 Sep 96 08:37:56 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <50rc6r$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx03-50.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <[e-mail]>, Avatar <[e-mail]> wrote:
>I have been following the thread under Is BALUN Necessary. While it is
>interesting, it doesn't directly answer the question. In various postings
>I have seen references to types of baluns that I haven't read about
>before. If the experts can take a few minutes from the other discussion,
>you can help me and others understand the published side of the hobby.
>
>I am familiar with the conventional baluns that have filled many pages
>over the years, but I have not read an Amateur publication in a decade.
>Please explain the differences between the conventional balun and (1) a
>current balun, (2) a voltage balun.
>
>I would also like to read more about using baluns as feedline chokes for
>common mode noise (low noise reception ala W8JI).
>
>Looking forward to learning more about my favorite subject... W0MAY
>

One of the major incentives causing me to go to the considerable trouble of
writing for publication has been to avoid having to say the same things
over and over again. Once published, most people can, one way or another,
look up the answer rather than having to repeat it.

In the case of baluns, two articles I recommend are "Some Aspects of the
Balun Problem", by Walter Maxwell, W2DU, QST, March, 1983, p. 38; and one I
wrote, "Baluns: What They Do and How They Do It", in the ARRL Antenna
Compendium, Vol. 1, p. 157. In it I coin the terms "current balun"
and "voltage balun" and explain that "current baluns" force equal and
opposite currents in two conductors, and "voltage baluns" force the
voltages at the output terminals to be equal and opposite relative to the
"cold" side of the input. Both articles explain when and why baluns are
desirable in an antenna system.

I don't know of any "conventional" balun which isn't in either of these two
categories.

You might find other articles in the amateur publications which would
increase your knowledge of this and other subjects.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:54 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!pineapp
From: [e-mail] (Daniel Curry)
Subject: Mosely TA-33 Question
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Netcom-Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
Date: Sun, 8 Sep 1996 03:51:42 GMT
Lines: 16
Sender: [e-mail]

 I am looking for information about the Mosely TA-33 beam?

1) What is needed to support the 40 meters traps?
   Is the support still available?

2) Can 12 and 17 meters elements can be added?
   If so how is the wind load?

3) Is Mosely still in business?


--
.----------------------------------------------+--------------------------.
| INTERNET: [e-mail]     (DC436)     | Daniel Curry             |
| AMPRNET : [e-mail]  [44.4.20.144] | WB6STW                   |
| AX.25   : wb6stw@n0ary.#NOCAL.CA.USA.NOAM    | DoD # 1450   SOHC4 # 136 |
'----------------------------------------------+--------------------------'


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:55 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.insinc.net!scanner.worldgate.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!netnews.nwnet.net!news.u.washington.edu!carson.u.washington.edu!jtyoung
From: "John T. Young" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Mosely TA-33 Question
Date: Sun, 8 Sep 1996 07:23:46 -0700
Organization: University of Washington
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: carson.u.washington.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
To: Daniel Curry <[e-mail]>
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>

Daniel, Moseley is very much in business and they produce a comprehensive
catalogue which will answer all of your questions in detail. Their phone
#: 800 325 4016 0r 800 9 MOSLEY. By the way, I just installed one of their
TA 33 Jr WARC beams and it is a terrific performer! Best, John, KI7JB.

On Sun, 8 Sep 1996, Daniel Curry wrote:

>  I am looking for information about the Mosely TA-33 beam?
>
> 1) What is needed to support the 40 meters traps?
>    Is the support still available?
>
> 2) Can 12 and 17 meters elements can be added?
>    If so how is the wind load?
>
> 3) Is Mosely still in business?
>
>
> --
> .----------------------------------------------+--------------------------.
> | INTERNET: [e-mail]     (DC436)     | Daniel Curry             |
> | AMPRNET : [e-mail]  [44.4.20.144] | WB6STW                   |
> | AX.25   : wb6stw@n0ary.#NOCAL.CA.USA.NOAM    | DoD # 1450   SOHC4 # 136 |
> '----------------------------------------------+--------------------------'
>
>



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:58 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!tezcat!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!news3.agis.net!NEWS!not-for-mail
From: Bob Lewis <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Mosely TA-33 Question
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 07:54:45 -0400
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Organization: AA4PB
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Joe Fitter BV/N0IAT <[e-mail]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 45

Joe Fitter BV/N0IAT wrote:
>
> >Daniel Curry wrote:
> >
> >  I am looking for information about the Mosely TA-33 beam?
> > 1) What is needed to support the 40 meters traps?
> >    Is the support still available?
> > 2) Can 12 and 17 meters elements can be added?
> >    If so how is the wind load?
> > 3) Is Mosely still in business?
>
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Mosley still exists -- mostly on the military end of the
> business but still making dependable/durable trap yagi
> antenna systems for the ham market.  They shipped a new
> trap to me when I lived in Tokyo -- service was excellent.
> Here's the address/fax/phone:
>
> Manufacturer:
>     Mosley Electronics, Inc.
>     10812 Ambassador Blvd.
>     St. Louis, MO 63132
>     Tel: [phone]
>     and: 1-800-325-4016
>     and: 1-314-994-7872
>     Fax: [phone]
>
> They can provide loads of technical information, especially
> on the old workhorse TA-33.
>
> 73 from The Republic of China on TAIWAN.    Joe
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Amateur Radio:  BV/N0IAT   Taipei TAIWAN Republic of China
>
>         http://www.isite.net.tw/bv1al/e-hist.htm
>
> ex.  7J1AOF (Japan)  YU3/N0IAT (Slovenia)  KA0ZDH (Novice)
> Licensed Radio Amateur since 1986.  Comments are mine only.
> ----------------------------------------------------------

Mosley makes a number of yagi antennas for 40 thru 10 meters including
WARC bands.  They have a catalog available.  They now only sell direct -
no distributors.



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:32:59 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!van-bc!unixg.ubc.ca!rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!aurora.cs.athabascau.ca!news.mag-net.com!ve7tcp.ampr.org!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (James F Bowling)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: (no subject)
Date: 7 Sep 96 18:02:40 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

add ham-ant


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:00 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.mindspring.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sgi.com!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!news
From: [e-mail] (W6KKT Jesse)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: T.J.BB3 vs High Sierra 'Screw Driver' antennas
Date: Sun, 08 Sep 1996 13:49:11 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 32
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dyn3.frazmtn.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/16.227

On Sat, 07 Sep 1996 18:01:34 +0500, "J.W." <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>Please,
>     Any of you who can compare the TJ BB3 with the High Sierra  screw
>driver antennas would be of great help to me in deciding on a chice of
>purchase. There seem to be some design basic differences. The BB3 having
>the burilium copper fingers, while the High Sierra has another, seeming
>better approach in terms of long term fragility and corrosion
>resistance.
>     The BB3 can handle 1500 watts PEP. The Sierra 800 watts PEP. Aside
>from this, what about durabilty, function, etc. tnx jeff

Hi Jeff, in the "real world" both of the above antennas have developed
problems when used with mobile amplifiers (500w - 1000w).  Eventually,
the contacts burn, from tuneing the antenna with the amplifier on.
The coil form itself changes dimension and melts from the heat of the
coil.  If you can find a "screwdriver" that has a fiberglass coil form
and  wound with #12 or larger wire it would be the best bet if you
intend to use a linear amplifier with your mobile system.
In all the mobile antenna field strength trials I have conducted  the
"BB3" has consistently out-performed all other "screwdrivers" tested
(BB3, High Sierra, Homebrew etc.).  No matter which one you purchase,
it is my opinion the "screwdriver" type mobile system is a very good
"compromise" for a antenna that will tune continuously 80-10m with a
lever switch in the cab of the vehicle.
HF mobile is the "way to go" if one lives in a area with CC&RS that
are not friendly towards Amateur Radio.    Good Luck.
73, Jesse Touhey, W6KKT





From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:03 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!xara.net!emerald.xara.net!news.thenet.net!news.kei.com!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news1.best.com!news.zeitgeist.net!news.greatbasin.net!usenet
From: Dick Flanagan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: T.J.BB3 vs High Sierra 'Screw Driver' antennas
Date: Sun, 08 Sep 1996 17:56:28 -0700
Organization: Libelle Productions, Inc.,Minden, Nevada, USA
Lines: 25
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: merlin.libelle.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)

On Sat, 07 Sep 1996 18:01:34 +0500, "J.W." <[e-mail]>
wrote:
>
>Please,
>     Any of you who can compare the TJ BB3 with the High Sierra screw
>driver antennas would be of great help to me in deciding on a chice of
>purchase.

Pardon me for adding to the confusion, but a great many high-power
mobile operators (low-power, too) are moving to the BANDHOPPER antenna.
It is made by Ben Grace (WA7BEF) of Clancy, MT.  It costs about twice as
much as your standard BB3 clone, but it is practically bullet-proof.  It
is quickly becoming the favorite of long-haul truckers who put hundreds
of thousands of miles on their antennas each year.

It handles 7-30 MHz and even has an add-on coil for 160M.  It comes in
both manual and remote tune flavors and is machined like a tank!

You can call Ben at 1-406-933-5646 and he will send you a very detailed
information package.  He doesn't advertise because he makes each one
himself and he doesn't want to get bogged down in too many orders, but
it is worth looking into if you want the best in mobile antennas that
can take a kilowatt without getting warm.
--
Dick Flanagan, W6OLD - ([e-mail]) - Minden, Nevada


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:04 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!news.net66.com!jolt.pagesat.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!ennfs.eas.asu.edu!xroads!news
From: [e-mail] (John DeRuiter)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: T.J.BB3 vs High Sierra 'Screw Driver' antennas
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 05:57:12 GMT
Organization: Crossroads Communications
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <51300q$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip24.xroads.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

I can not comment on the High Sierra, but I have a BB3.  It is mounted
on the spare tire rack of my Jeep Cherokee and I am very pleased so
far.  I have been on some very very bad(washboard) roads and the BB3
was given a heck of a vibration test with no failures.  It appears to
very rugged.  Let me know what you find out.

73 de KJ7GU,  John in Phoenix  ([e-mail])

"J.W." <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Please,
>     Any of you who can compare the TJ BB3 with the High Sierra  screw
>driver antennas would be of great help to me in deciding on a chice of
>purchase. There seem to be some design basic differences. The BB3 having
>the burilium copper fingers, while the High Sierra has another, seeming
>better approach in terms of long term fragility and corrosion
>resistance.
>     The BB3 can handle 1500 watts PEP. The Sierra 800 watts PEP. Aside
>from this, what about durabilty, function, etc. tnx jeff




From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:05 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsfeed1.aimnet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!agate!newsgate.duke.edu!news.duq.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!newsflash.concordia.ca!news.nstn.ca!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!n1van.istar!news.InterGate.BC.CA!usenet
From: [e-mail] (David Tse)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FT-50R antenna alternatives
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 1996 10:43:58 GMT
Organization: Internet Gateway Corporation
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <50osgd$[e-mail]>
References: <50hjg9$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm5s13.intergate.bc.ca
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.equipment:32205 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24069

[e-mail] (bnr) wrote:

>I'm looking for alternative suggestions to the stock rubber duck that
>comes with the FT50.  I would like to find something a little smaller.
>Any suggestions would be appreciated.

Diamond SRH805 144/430/1200 4.5cm SMA  Yen 2800
From Japan CQ Ham Radio mag.

I am not sure if it has the long rubber skirt like the stock one to
cover the bottom.  Comet also has one but I don't have info on hand.

>Brian Raines     N3XWJ  ||  www.universe.digex.net/~bnr/3000.html
>[e-mail]  ||  The Uniden BC3000xlt


  ----
  In real life: David Tse    In ham radio: VE7MDT
  Primary e-mail: [e-mail]
  Alternative e-mail: [e-mail], [e-mail]
  ----



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:06 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news1.channel1.com!wizard.pn.com!news.xensei.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.zeitgeist.net!news.greatbasin.net!usenet
From: Dick Flanagan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FT-50R antenna alternatives
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 1996 10:31:40 -0700
Organization: Libelle Productions, Inc.,Minden, Nevada, USA
Lines: 9
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <50hjg9$[e-mail]> <50osgd$[e-mail]> <50p3uf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: merlin.libelle.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win16; U)
To: bnr <[e-mail]>
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.equipment:32174 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24039

bnr wrote:
>
> Thanks to all who responded...The best alternative that has been suggested
> so far (IMHO) would be the soon to be released Comet SMA501.  I close
> relative to the Comet "Miracle Baby," but with an SMA adapter.

Just pray it performs better than the Miracle Baby, at least on VHF.
--
Dick Flanagan, W6OLD - ([e-mail]) - Minden, Nevada


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:07 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!xara.net!emerald.xara.net!news.thenet.net!news.kei.com!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.mindspring.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!nntp.earthlink.net!usenet
From: ANDREW JENTIS <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FT-50R antenna alternatives
Date: Sun, 08 Sep 1996 19:09:17 -0700
Organization: Earthlink Network, Inc.
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <50hjg9$[e-mail]> <50osgd$[e-mail]> <50p3uf$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: max1-sc-ca-17.earthlink.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; U)
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.equipment:32211 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24076

Dick Flanagan wrote:
>
> bnr wrote:
> >
> > Thanks to all who responded...The best alternative that has been suggested
> > so far (IMHO) would be the soon to be released Comet SMA501.  I close
> > relative to the Comet "Miracle Baby," but with an SMA adapter.
>
> Just pray it performs better than the Miracle Baby, at least on VHF.
> --
> Dick Flanagan, W6OLD - ([e-mail]) - Minden, Nevadai ordered t
he standard c508 dual band antenna and it works great. half
the size of the std yaesu antenna. call standard radio - about $25.


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:08 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ais.net!jpss
From: [e-mail] (Jack)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FT-50R antenna alternatives
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 1996 16:18:14 -0600
Organization: American Information Systems, Inc.
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <50hjg9$[e-mail]> <50osgd$[e-mail]> <50p3uf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ts03-04.dialup.ais.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Newsreader: Yet Another NewsWatcher 2.2.0
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.equipment:32274 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24131


> : >I'm looking for alternative suggestions to the stock rubber duck that
> : >comes with the FT50.  I would like to find something a little smaller.
> : >Any suggestions would be appreciated.
>
>.  I close
> relative to the Comet "Miracle Baby," but with an SMA adapter. .
Anybody with more information on
> this antenna, please let me know.
>
> Brian Raines     N3XWJ  ||


  It's JUNQUE, JUNK, garbage...etc.  It's just a piss poor dummy load
trying to act as a radiator.  Do NOT waste your money!!!! I have not seen
one person that had any positive results with that abortion of an alledged
antenna, I know 2 people that had the finals in there HT's go out...using
just that antenna...


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:08 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news1.channel1.com!wizard.pn.com!brighton.openmarket.com!decwrl!tribune.usask.ca!canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca!portal.mbnet.mb.ca!news
From: Bill Evans <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Uni-Hat vs HF-2V
Date: 8 Sep 1996 17:51:28 GMT
Organization: MBnet - Manitoba's Connection To The Internet
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <50v130$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ts3m-10.mbnet.mb.ca

Ioperate a lot on 160m and 80m from a standard city lot and am very interested
 in the Butternut HF-2V (with 160m coil) as compared with the CTVSR Uni-Hat.
My interest is focused on 80m and 160m use of these antennas.  Opinions and re
commndations would be very much appreciated

Bill Evans
VE4UD
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:10 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!worldlinx.com!thunder.mgl.ca!server2.netrics.com!n2tor.istar!tor.istar!east.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!winternet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!awards.demon.co.uk!Steve
From: Steve G Bryan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 486DX4-100 Multi-Media For Sale
Date: Sat, 7 Sep 1996 00:28:41 +0100
Organization: Worked All Britain
Lines: 9
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: awards.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: awards.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 1.12 <JY47FqO0ds1gqcPPuee9c75uYd>

Complete with Sound Blaster 16 Card, Cirrus Logic 1Meg Video Card, 2sp
CD Rom, 540Meg WD CAVIAR Hard Drive, 8Meg RAM, 14" SVGA Monitor ++++++
Mouse/Mat +++++ Speakers +++++ Software   ++++++ Manuals Etc Etc.
Just passed my Driving Test and NEED MONEY to buy my first car.
Only access to E-Mail is at weekends as I am serving in the Armed Forces
please contact my Dad for further details, 73 de Richard N Bryan G0PLF.
[e-mail]
--
Steve G Bryan


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:10 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.nevada.edu!news.tamu.edu!news.sgi.com!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!zdc-e!super.zippo.com!zdc!szdc!szdc-e!news
From: [e-mail] (Alan)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: HDR-300 for 400.00
Date: Sun, 08 Sep 1996 20:01:29 GMT
Organization: Zippo
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <50v9a7$[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

73, Alan   HDR-300A for 400.00   [e-mail]
-----------------------------------------
Alan   [e-mail]
-----------------------------------------



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:11 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-8.sprintlink.net!news.nevada.edu!news.tamu.edu!news.sgi.com!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!netaxs.com!sea.waterw.com!usenet
From: Ed Cregger <"[e-mail]"@ecregger.accsyst.com>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Austin Antenna's Suburban
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 15:11:35 -0400
Organization: Artisan Communications
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <50kkh4$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: access3.accsyst.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; U)

Does anyone have any observations about this antenna and/or the matching
quadplexer unit? Your input will be appreciated.

Ed Cregger
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:12 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.fibr.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.compuserve.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: "Ronald D. Lucier" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Butterfly drawing
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 1996 09:19:18 -0700
Organization: Optical Hybrids, Inc.
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wor-ma3-32.ix.netcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-NETCOM-Date: Mon Sep 09  8:19:48 AM CDT 1996
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win95; U; 16bit)

Lili & Manu wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have a limited space (attic of the condo...) and would like to try
> something better than my inverted V and my ISO loop (I have better
> result with the ISO than the Inv.V)
>
> I have heard good thing about the butterfly shape antenna.
>
> Can someone tell me where I can find some drawings and dimensions of
> that antenna (20 m and others).
>
> Thanks 73 + 51
>
> KS4EQ
>
> [e-mail]

I have the commercial version, the Butternut HF-5B.  Works o.k.  I'll
send you a copy of the manual if you will pay for the copy and mail
costs.  Reply direct with your address.

73

de WA1UWZ, Ron Lucier


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:13 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!nntp.coast.net!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!ix.netcom.com!news.compuserve.com!news.production.compuserve.com!news
From: Roger Cox <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Aluminium tubing
Date: 9 Sep 1996 17:12:38 GMT
Organization: Telex Comm.
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <511j66$9hv$[e-mail]>
References: <necrolar.841175510@merle>

6063-T832 and 6061-T6 have the SAME yeild and tensile strength
according to our vendors.  6063-T832 is shiny and may have
additional corrosion-resistance over 6061-T6.  6061-T6 has a dull
gray appearance.

Roger WB0DGF
Telex Communications, Inc. (Hy-Gain)

--
Roger Cox


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:14 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!psgrain!iafrica.com!pipex-sa.net!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!news.be.innet.net!INbe.net!news.nl.innet.net!INnl.net!hunter.premier.net!news1.erols.com!howland.erols.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!cc:Mail
From: randy x4dow <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Trimming antenna elements for specific frequency
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 96 16:11:11 EST
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: cc:Mail
Encoding: 12 Text
X-Mail2News-Path: relay2.smtp.psi.net!CCMSMTP.DAI.COM!cc:Mail

     I recently picked up a couple of ~170 MHz HTs and (from a different sourc
e)
     an antenna. I would like to trim the antenna elements to optimize
     performance (transmit and receive) specifically for the 170 MHz frequency
.

     The antenna has one vertical element and four equally spaced horizontal (
90
     degrees to vertical) elements, with a coax feed off the bottom. All
     elements are thin whips.

     Although I get an SWR of 2 and a good power reading from the antenna,
     performance is dismal.

     Any suggestions would be appreciated.



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:15 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.mindspring.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sgi.com!sdd.hp.com!hpscit.sc.hp.com!rkarlqu
From: [e-mail] (Richard Karlquist)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: how large must a monopole ground plane be?
Date: 9 Sep 1996 16:29:35 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <511glf$[e-mail]>
References: <50i5ih$[e-mail]> <50ip6c$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mentor23.scd.hp.com

In article <50ip6c$[e-mail]>,
W8JI  Tom <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>
>There have been some very good studies on this, and some real questionable
>ones. Brown, Lewis and Epstein did a lengthy study for RCA in the 30's,
>and more recently a W2 (I think it was W2FMI) did a study in an amateur
>magazine.
>
>Both studies essentially agreed, and data I have measured here also agrees
>closely with both studies. You'll likely need around 60 radials 1/4 wl
>long if you want a good signal, especially with a short vertical. If you
>can't do that, do all you can towards that.
>
>Computer models seem to disagree with some real world tests, so there is
>some question about their accuracy modelling radials.
>
>73 Tom

Speaking of real world tests, does anyone know if it would be
valid to build a 1/30 scale model of a 14 MHz antenna at 432 MHz.
and do real world ground plane experiments to see what would happen
back at 14 MHz.  It would depend on how similar ground
characteristics are at 432 MHz. vs 14 MHz.  When you do
NEC simulations, how do you know what to put in for ground
permittivity and resisitivity?  I only see references to "poor,
good, excellent and sea water" grounds, as if
ground=ground=ground from DC to daylight.

Rick Karlquist N6RK
[e-mail]







From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:16 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!netcom.net.uk!xara.net!emerald.xara.net!news.thenet.net!trellis.wwnet.com!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!news.sgi.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx16-19
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: how large must a monopole ground plane be?
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 96 19:38:27 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <511rl9$[e-mail]>
References: <50i5ih$[e-mail]> <50ip6c$[e-mail]> <511glf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx16-19.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <511glf$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Richard Karlquist) wrote:

>Speaking of real world tests, does anyone know if it would be
>valid to build a 1/30 scale model of a 14 MHz antenna at 432 MHz.
>and do real world ground plane experiments to see what would happen
>back at 14 MHz.  It would depend on how similar ground
>characteristics are at 432 MHz. vs 14 MHz.  When you do
>NEC simulations, how do you know what to put in for ground
>permittivity and resisitivity?  I only see references to "poor,
>good, excellent and sea water" grounds, as if
>ground=ground=ground from DC to daylight.

In order to have a scale model antenna give the same results as the original,
the resistivity has to be scaled as well as the physical dimensions. This is
because skin depth decreases as frequency increses. (The scale model resistivi
ty
has to be scaled by 1/sqrt(f).) For many models this won't make an appreciable

difference, but when modeling over real ground it would. Another problem with
doing real-ground scale modeling is that irregularities in the ground contour
will cause greater effects at higher frequencies because they're larger in ter
ms
of wavelength.

When doing NEC simulations, you don't usually know what to put in for the grou
nd
constants. The ARRL Antenna Book, for example, lists typical constants for a f
ew
common kinds of ground (e.g., pastoral, rich soil, etc.). Some of these are
commonly referred to as "good", "poor", and the like, but we seldom know just
what the constants are for our local ground. In addition, NEC assumes that the

ground is perfectly flat, and that the conductivity and dielectric constant
don't change with depth -- which of course they actually do. Another
little-known characteristic of real ground is that the conductivity seems to
change with frequency. Whether this is inherent or due to stratification, I
don't know and don't think anyone else does, either.

NEC is still useful for seeing the effects of ground, nevertheless. And in man
y
cases, such as horizontally polarized antennas, normal variations in ground
constants make little difference in overall performance.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:17 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!ix.netcom.com!news
From: KD1YV <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.space,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: W. CT Hamfest This Sunday, Newtown, CT 15-Sep
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 1996 22:52:34 -0300
Organization: Hamily !
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tfx-us6-16.ix.netcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-NETCOM-Date: Mon Sep 09  7:54:40 PM PDT 1996
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win16; I)
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:16673 rec.radio.amateur.space:7469 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24089

THE WESTERN CONNECTICUT HAMFEST
Sponsored by the Candlewood Amateur Radio Association

Just 14 miles from the NY/CT State line!

Sunday, Sept. 15, 1996                      0900-1400
Edmond Town Hall                 Route 6, Newtown, CT
Tables inside                      Tailgating outside
ARRL Sanctioned                    Handicapped Access
Door Prizes                             Ample Parking
Gourmet Fare                            Rain or shine

Talk-in 147.12/.72 PL 141.3

General admission $4.00 at the door (what a deal!)

Tailgating $6.00, inside table reservations $10.00 each, (both
include 1 admission), mail to:
Candlewood Amateur Radio Association, PO BOX 3441, Danbury CT 06813

For more info, phone [phone] or [phone].

Hope to see you all there.
73 de KD1YV
Jim


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:18 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.net66.com!jolt.pagesat.net!fsc.fujitsu.com!agate!spool.mu.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!news.usa.net!news.usa.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Michael Cunningham)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Lightning Arrester
Date: 9 Sep 1996 19:04:59 -0600
Organization: Internet Express (800-592-1240 customer service)
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <512err$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: earth.usa.net

I am looking for a particular type of lightning arrester. I don't know
if it is still being made. It has a PL-259 plug on one end and an
SO-239 socket on the other. In the middle is a screw to attach a ground
wire. Is this type available? Where? How much?

This will be used on the coax from a scanner antenna. No transmitting
will be done. If I can find this type I wouldn't have to cut my coax
to insert a lightning arrester.

TIA..Mike

---
 ■ NFX v1.3 [000]



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:19 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!tezcat!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!spool.mu.edu!torn!govonca3!pepperb
From: [e-mail] (Brien Pepperdine)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Any user info on the Gem Quad
Date: 9 Sep 1996 17:20:16 GMT
Organization: Government of Ontario
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <511jkg$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.75.156.245
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #12 (NOV)

If anyone has had any experience with the Gem Quad antenna, out of
Manitoba, Canada, I would please like to hear.

I really don't think I have the room for the footprint of a free-standing
tower supporting a normal 3 element beam.
As an alternate, I wondered if something like the Gem Quad is sufficient
enough a 'gain' antenna to be used. How would it compare to a beam I
theoretically would normally purchase and use if I could?
I also wonder what sort of tower would be sufficent for a Gem Quad's wind
load spec? I have a reasonably heavy guage TV tower at about 37 feet now,
so with a 10 foot mast etc. I would in theory be interested in mounting
the Gem Quad on that.

I WILL look in the usual reference books on quads versus beams etc., in
terms of comparison, but actual user comments on the results of that
antenna, and experiences in mast-mounting requirments and so on would be
of use to me.

Thanks,

Brien
Toronto
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:20 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!panix!news1.erols.com!howland.erols.net!spool.mu.edu!munnari.OZ.AU!metro!metro!asstdc.scgt.oz.au!nsw.news.telstra.net!ihug.co.nz!Chaos.es.co.nz!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Lachy Garrick)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Simple antenna required for AM/FM at home
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 02:38:57 GMT
Organization: Efficient Software Internet Service
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <512o4v$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port19-metis.es.co.nz
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

I don't normally subscribe to this channel, but I'm hoping someone can
give a bit of advise.  My parents who live in a remote area with some
hills around, recently splashed out on a flash new stereo.  However,
despite all the usual bells and whistles, it won't pick up any radio
stations AM or FM here in New Zealand.  There are only 2 stations that
are normally audible and poor reception is all thats normally
received.  Obiously, some sort of extra antenna is probably all that's
required.  Any suggestions on what and how to hook it up would be
appreciated.

I don't know of the exact frequequencies of hand but obviously it's in
the 88 - 95mHz FM and about 850 - 1600kHz AM range.

I got a couple of books out of the lbrary the other day and after
having selected what I considered to be the most simple books
available - I figure you need a qualification in Quantum Physics to
understand it OR own your own radio station!!

NB: They have a huge pylon about 100meters from the house which
carries 210,000volts.  No doubt it doesn't help reception much but the
pylon would make a good aerial...!!



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:21 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!panix!news1.erols.com!howland.erols.net!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.bc.net!nntp.portal.ca!news.mindlink.net!van-bc!n1van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!tor.istar!east.istar!news1.istar.ca!news
From: [e-mail] (James Poulin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Simple antenna required for AM/FM at home
Date: 10 Sep 1996 06:41:26 GMT
Organization: iSTAR Internet
Lines: 64
Message-ID: <5132im$[e-mail]>
References: <512o4v$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ts5-14.ott.istar.ca
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227

On Tue, 10 Sep 1996 02:38:57 GMT, [e-mail] (Lachy Garrick)
wrote:

>I don't normally subscribe to this channel, but I'm hoping someone can
>give a bit of advise.  My parents who live in a remote area with some
>hills around, recently splashed out on a flash new stereo.  However,
>despite all the usual bells and whistles, it won't pick up any radio
>stations AM or FM here in New Zealand.  There are only 2 stations that
>are normally audible and poor reception is all thats normally
>received.  Obiously, some sort of extra antenna is probably all that's
>required.  Any suggestions on what and how to hook it up would be
>appreciated.
>
>I don't know of the exact frequequencies of hand but obviously it's in
>the 88 - 95mHz FM and about 850 - 1600kHz AM range.
>
>I got a couple of books out of the lbrary the other day and after
>having selected what I considered to be the most simple books
>available - I figure you need a qualification in Quantum Physics to
>understand it OR own your own radio station!!
>
>NB: They have a huge pylon about 100meters from the house which
>carries 210,000volts.  No doubt it doesn't help reception much but the
>pylon would make a good aerial...!!

Hi Lachy,

The simplest FM Antenna is real easy to make. Take 2 wires that are
about 8 feet long each (covered in plastic is fine) and connect one
wire to one "screw terminal" on the back of your tuner, do the same
for the other wire, hooking it up to the other "screw terminal" in
back of your Tuner.

Next, take each wire and run it up the wall, about 4 feet. Keep them
seperated about 1 inch. Once you run it up four feet, you will still
have some left over at the top. Simply, turn each wire 90 degrees in
opposite directions. Make sure the wires do not cross each other.

For my example. you may need to set your news reader to "Fixed Pitch
Font" to see the lines properly !

e.g.

    ----------+ +-----------
              | |
              | |
              | |
              | |
              | |
              | |
      Your Tuner is here

Basicaly you want to make a letter "T" on your wall.

This type of antenna is called a "Dipole Antenna". They work wonders!

Let me know how it works.

Good Luck,

James Poulin
Ottawa, Ontario
Canada



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:22 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.winterlan.com!frii.com!usenet
From: Avatar <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Simple antenna required for AM/FM at home
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 17:58:32 -0700
Organization: Front Range Internet, Inc.
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <512o4v$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftc-78.ppp.frii.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; U)

Lachy Garrick wrote:
>
> I don't normally subscribe to this channel, but I'm hoping someone can
> give a bit of advise.  My parents who live in a remote area with some
> hills around, recently splashed out on a flash new stereo.  However,
> despite all the usual bells and whistles, it won't pick up any radio
> stations AM or FM here in New Zealand.  There are only 2 stations that
> are normally audible and poor reception is all thats normally
> received.  Obiously, some sort of extra antenna is probably all that's
> required.  Any suggestions on what and how to hook it up would be
> appreciated.
>
> I don't know of the exact frequequencies of hand but obviously it's in
> the 88 - 95mHz FM and about 850 - 1600kHz AM range.
>
> I got a couple of books out of the lbrary the other day and after
> having selected what I considered to be the most simple books
> available - I figure you need a qualification in Quantum Physics to
> understand it OR own your own radio station!!
>
> NB: They have a huge pylon about 100meters from the house which
> carries 210,000volts.  No doubt it doesn't help reception much but the
> pylon would make a good aerial...!!

If the only two weak stations available are FM and in the same direction,
you may need to install a Yagi antenna on the roof. If the AM stations
are weak, you probably will need to run a long wire outside as high as
practical. I strongly recommend you stay away from the pylon without
help from someone with electrical experience. While it may offer a way to
attach that long wire, it is hazardous to your health. There is a chance
that you will pick up some noise from those high voltage lines wherever
you run the wire. Finally, any outside wire or other antenna can attract
lightening!

Regards,
W0MAY




From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:23 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!panix!news1.erols.com!howland.erols.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ac.net!pacifier!usenet
From: dbaulig <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Wanted TH6-DX Antenna
Date: 10 Sep 1996 05:37:06 GMT
Organization: Pacifier BBS, Vancouver, Wa.  ([phone])
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <512uq2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip143.van5.pacifier.com

I am looking to buy a TH-6DX antenna, should you have one for sale, please
give me a call 360-254-6202, name is Dan


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:24 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!panix!news1.erols.com!howland.erols.net!math.ohio-state.edu!news.physics.uiowa.edu!news.uiowa.edu!news
From: "William E. Sabin" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary  for a dipole
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 05:35:22 -0700
Organization: none
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <5126t2$[e-mail]> <512tel$[e-mail]> <512tsf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-103.cedar-rapids.lib.ia.us
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; U)

WB3U wrote:
>
> This must be the reason Andrew puts a vinyl jacket on their
> Heliax, it prevents users from being burned by all the
> external RF.

If you were to touch the braid of a coax at the center of a dipole you
could very easily get burned.

Bill W0IYH


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:25 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!panix!news1.erols.com!howland.erols.net!cs.utexas.edu!news.ti.com!newsfeed.mc.ti.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jim Flanders)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 1/4 wave 2m whip on a Ford Explorer
Date: 10 Sep 1996 14:57:32 GMT
Organization: Texas Instruments @ Lewisville
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <513vks$[e-mail]>
References: <50sf3c$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shtip114.dseg.ti.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.7

HI Fred:
    See my posting on results using 5/8 waves, you may decide not to go
that way.  I would try to mount a 1/4 wave to the rear of the explorer
with the top slightly above the roof, and include some 1/4 wave radials
of its own. This may be difficult mechanically, but maybe not.
Regards - Jim W0oog/5

In article <50sf3c$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>
>Any ideas on the best approach to mounting a 1/4 wave 2m antenna
>in a Ford Explorer ?  I have about 10" of clearance getting in and
>out of the garage and I'd like to come up with a permanent system
>that performs reasonably well.  The default option is to remove and
>replace my trusty mag mount every day (twice a day, actually...) but
>that's kind of a hassle.
>
>An additional constraint is that I don't want to put any holes in the
>vehicle. Through-the-glass mounting might be an option but I'm
skeptical
>about performance and would probably have to mount it significantly
below
>the plane of the roof.  How about ran gutter or rack mounts (assuming
>I can pivot the whip)?  How does one get a good ground connection
>with a roof rack mount ? Maybe a 5/8 mounted on the rear bumper ?
>
>Your thoughts ?
>
>Thanks & 73
> Fred, KF9ZI
>
>



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:26 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!rjo02.embratel.net.br!news.unisys.com.br!news.uoregon.edu!mayonews.mayo.edu!newshub.tc.umn.edu!spool.mu.edu!howland.erols.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!news.mr.net!inet-serv.com!n0jcf.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Chris Elmquist)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 1/4 wave 2m whip on a Ford Explorer
Date: 11 Sep 1996 09:19:58 -0500
Organization: The Basement of N0JCF
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <516hqe$[e-mail]>
References: <50sf3c$[e-mail]> <513vks$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: n0jcf.com

>In article <50sf3c$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>>
>>
>>Any ideas on the best approach to mounting a 1/4 wave 2m antenna
>>in a Ford Explorer ?  I have about 10" of clearance getting in and
>>out of the garage and I'd like to come up with a permanent system
>>that performs reasonably well.  The default option is to remove and
>>replace my trusty mag mount every day (twice a day, actually...) but
>>that's kind of a hassle.
>>
>>An additional constraint is that I don't want to put any holes in the
>>vehicle. Through-the-glass mounting might be an option but I'm
>skeptical
>>about performance and would probably have to mount it significantly
>below
>>the plane of the roof.

I have successfully installed an NMO mount on a bracket to the
front fender directly across the hood from the factory installed
broadcast antenna on the Explorer.  I can then use either a dual-band
2m/70cm whip (which ends up being nearly the same length as the
BCB antenna) or a 2m 5/8 wave... the later of which hits the
garage door when going in and out but doesn't seem to cause
any problems with the door or the antenna.

This required drilling two small holes to allow screwing the bracket
to the inside edge of the fender along the line where the hood
meets the fender.

I haven't had any RFI problems with this installation either.

The Larson on-glass antenna that I originally tried on one of
the rear side windows... fell off after a week and disappeared
along the freeway somewhere... inspite of following installation
details to the letter.    I can't recommend those.

Now, if I could just get the brakes to stop pulling, the
vibration to go away, the windshield to quit cracking, the
rear end to stop clunking, the paint to stop peeling off
the side mirrors and the wiper arms, the oil to stop leaking
from the rear differential, and the the motor to run well after
it's warmed up... I'd be set with my '94 Explorer.

I'll let you know how I install an antenna on my new Pathfinder.

Good luck with your Explorer. I certainly hope you don't have
the problems I have had.

73, Chris
--
Chris Elmquist, N0JCF
[e-mail]
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:27 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!tezcat!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!dialnet!news
From: Kelly <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Looking for comments on TH3JR
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 21:07:55 -0500
Organization: Digital Internet Access Link, Inc. Springfield, MO 873-DIAL
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dsar6.dialnet.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; U)

Hello all:
I am thinking about buying a Hy Gain TH3JR.  I will be mounting this
antenna on the roof of the house at about 30 feet.  I have a lot of room
here, but I do not want to put up a tower.  Any other options that don't
cost an arm and a leg? Thanks in advance...

Kelly Ellison - WB0WQS

               [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:28 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!demos!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Kurt's rectangle
Date: 11 Sep 1996 05:09:13 GMT
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <515hhp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 245.phoenix-1.az.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22ATT (Windows; U; 16bit)

I've been looking for a 40m antenna with a lower angle
of radiation than my 102ft dipole. In this month's "Aerials"
Kurt describes a full-wave rectangle that sounds good. He
claims a 30deg TOA. I modeled it and got 2.63dBi gain
compared to a half-square's gain of 3.34. That's not much
difference and these two antennas use the same amount of
wire. Anybody got any ideas which would be better over
poor ground in AridZone?

thanks and 73, Cecil, W6RCA




From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:29 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.ici.net!news.wizard.com !dimensional.com!csn!nntp-xfer-1.csn.net!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.corpcomm.net!funny.bahnhof.se!seunet!news2.swip.net!mn6.swip.net!mn5.swip.net!news
From: Maude Schyffert <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Actie antenna noise canceller
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 08:48:23 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <50v3dm$[e-mail]> <510lcf$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup108-7-3.swipnet.se
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-User: s-12444
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b6Gold (Win16; I)

W8JI Tom wrote:
>
> In article <50v3dm$[e-mail]>, Cecil Moore
> <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> >
> >Hi Tom, what are your thoughts on having an insensitive antenna receiving
> >local signals, including local noise, and having a sensitive antenna
> >receiving the desired signal plus local noise? Then subtract these two
> >signals and amplify what's left. The key is to avoid receiving the
> desired
> >signal on the local antenna. This approach should work approximately the
> >same way as audio noise cancellation.
> >
> >73, Cecil, W6RCA
> >
> >
>
> And it will work. The requirement is to put the noise antenna near the
> noise, or focus it on the noise. And have the signal antenna as focused on
> the signal as much as possible.
>
> This stuff gets complicated fast, I don't know if I'm ready for another
> balun length thread, hi.
>
> All the ANC-4 does is turn any two antennas into a simple phased receiving
> array. My loop array does the same thing, and so does a yagi if you turn
> it til the noise is nulled.
>
> 73 Tom

Well I understand the theory of working, the problem was/is if a
thyristor noise spectrum is so wide taht in order to cancell that you
need to cancell most of the signal as well, how does a thyrister
spectrum looks like ??

Maude


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:31 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.erols.net!news2.digex.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Barry Anderson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Actie antenna noise canceller
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 08:08:59 -0400
Organization: Anderson Desktop Publishing
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dcc02685.slip.digex.net
X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v1.00

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] says...
> Hi folks,
>
> Can anyone help me with this..... I am living in down-town
Stockholm,
> Sweden and I have a lot of thyristor controlled ventilator
all around
> and of course not shilded so I have a very high nois level
on 3.5 Mhz,
> it is S9+10 normally. Goes down on higher freqencis...
> I have been looking at active noise cancellers e.g. ANC-4
but am not
> shure it will cure this type of boad band noise.....Anyone
with
> experiance or tips ??????
>
> SM0BKZ
Maude ...

    I have a 230,000 Volt line 1/4 mile from my condominium. I
also have lots of noise birdies from all of the TV sets in the
building. If it were not for the ANC-4 it would be impossible
to ham. Although these noise sources are different and the
phases obviously different, I find that I can find a spot on
the dial which eliminates a lot of BOTH types of noise. The
secret is the noise antenna. It took me a few weeks of
experimenting to get it right, but finally ... I have
demonstrated this unit to several of my ham friends and have
sold the unit to every one of them. The job it does is
incredable. I know I sound like a salesman, but I am only a
satisfied user.
--
Barry Anderson K3SUI
Frederick, MD. 21702
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:32 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-12.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-22.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-ana-7.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usr1ip47.azstarnet.com!Gilfrey
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Novice: Hallicrafters
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 21:07:45 LOCAL
Organization: StarNet
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr1ip47.azstarnet.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4]

My old man has a 40 year old short wave Hallicrafters radio with big knobs,
fuses, dials and all that.  I know nothing about these things, but the experts

say the radio is junk by today's standards and that no one plays with short
wave anymore.  Is this true?  Why?  Just so I know some tiny little bit about
the subject.  Thx.


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:33 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!news.acsu.buffalo.edu!news.drenet.dnd.ca!crc-news.doc.ca!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!dg198
From: [e-mail] (Frank Sved)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Novice: Hallicrafters
Date: 11 Sep 1996 12:35:35 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 27
Sender: [e-mail] (Frank Sved)
Message-ID: <516bmn$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Frank Sved)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca


 ([e-mail]) writes:
> My old man has a 40 year old short wave Hallicrafters radio with big knobs,
> fuses, dials and all that.  I know nothing about these things, but the exper
ts
> say the radio is junk by today's standards and that no one plays with short
> wave anymore.  Is this true?  Why?  Just so I know some tiny little bit abou
t
> the subject.  Thx.


I like old radios, the guy that told you shortwave is dead probably said
the samething about other hobbies he has never tried.

some do.
some talk.

As for your Hallicrafter, you have two options.

        1) Hang on to it, put a piece of wire in the ant hole and listen, or

        2) Sell it to me,,,,, [e-mail]

Bye for now...

--


  Bye for now, Frank Sved (VE3GID) at [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:36 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsserver.pixel.kodak.com!news.thenet.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sgi.com!news.tamu.edu!news.utdallas.edu!news01.aud.alcatel.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (dick sander)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Top loaded verticals
Date: 11 Sep 1996 13:38:54 GMT
Organization: Alcatel Network Systems Inc.
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <516fde$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: techws06.aud.alcatel.com

From the Top Band Reflector - Re: 160/80M beverage lengths, transmitting
antennas, Tom W8JI wrote:

>Top loaded verticals have higher radiaion resistance, and less ground loss
>than a base loaded vertical for a given height. The improvement in efficiency
>can be nearly four fold with top loading over the same height base loaded
>short vertical.

No problem with that.

>With a 1/8 wl radiator you will probably see less change, but
>the change should be very noticable.

Tom, could you be a little more specific (ie, about two fold, etc.).
The reason I'm asking is that I'm in a mental debate over modifying my two
Hygain 18HT hytowers (approx 1/8 electrical wl radiator).

I've already changed the spacing from 62 ft to 126 ft. This weekend I'm
renting a ditch witch to bury the feed line.

My dilemma is:
If I modify them by reducing their length to get down to the larger dia.
tubing for strength, and I install a coil at the top with a "big" capacity
hat, I can improve efficiency. But I'll lose the natural resonance on 80m.

If I use only base loading (as I've been doing on a single hytower) for 160m,
with reasonable loss of efficiency, I can also continue to use them on 80m.

It boils down to 160m only with top loading and 1/4 wl spacing good efficiency
vs
80m with 1/2 spacing and 160m base loading (poorer efficiency) with 1/4 wl
spacing. Your comments would be appreciated.

73, Dick - K5QY






From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:38 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-12.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!mr.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.bctel.net!news.mag-net.com!ve7tcp.ampr.org!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Mark Rennebaum)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Anyone ever use a Ventenna
Date: 11 Sep 96 16:52:39 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]


George J. Molnar ([e-mail]) on Tue, 10 Sep 1996 wrote:

> Hah! Not quite THAT stealthy. The feeder connection is a short length of
> RG-58 with an inline SO239. You can install whatever coax you feel you
> need after that (I used RG213 run down a corner of my roof to the rain
> gutter, through the gutter & into a basement window).

George - How tall is the Ventenna? Do you have just the 2m or the
dualband version? What is the radiation pattern like; ie can I work
LEO satellites? How much power can it handle? Where does the feedline
originate from (outside or inside of pipe)? What color is it - can I
paint it?

Whew! Sorry for all the questions but there is a real lack of
information about this antenna...

- Mark

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Mark Rennebaum  KC7KMP                       Information Technology
 Motorola MCG                                 Phone:  [phone]
 2900 South Diablo Way                        Pager:  (602)-244-3252 x1684
 Tempe Arizona 85282                          FAX:    [phone]
 Mail Drop AZ43 - DW284                       [e-mail]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:39 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!metro.atlanta.com!cpk-news-feed3.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-feed2.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!warwick!newsfeed.ed.ac.uk!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!news.genacc.com!lade.news.pipex.net!pipex!tube.news.pipex.net!pipex!soap.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet
From: Philip Simpson <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: uk.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna dB gain
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 19:14:12 -0700
Organization: UUNet PIPEX server (post doesn't reflect views of UUNet PIPEX)
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: an212.du.pipex.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I; 16bit)
Xref: news2.epix.net uk.radio.amateur:15558 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24123

Hello

As an avid listener of VHF airband transmitions, I have recently decided
to investigate making my own antennas, I have discovered that various
designs seem to give an improvement over a discone, I would appreciate
some advice;

Is it possible to measure the dB gain of an antenna without actually
using it to transmit, which as you will appreciate is illegal, and
totally unadvisable on the particular band of interest.

Awaiting your response,


Phil.


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:39 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uuneo.neosoft.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Don Sterner)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Scantenna Performance Problem?
Date: 6 Sep 1996 20:38:29 GMT
Organization: NeoSoft, Inc.
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <50q245$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.109.9.212
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.8 (x86 32bit)

In article <[e-mail]>, Wally Chopyk said...
>
>Hi,
>
>I have just installed a Scantenna (from Grove Enterprises) for my
>scanner. Problem is that the low VHF signals (118-145 Mhz) are weak and
>noisy compared to what the extended whip on the scanner is capable of. If
>I disconnect the coax at the scanner and touch either the centre or
>shield to the input of the scanner, the frequencies in question are
>strong and noise free. If I reconnect the coax to the scanner, weak
>signls and noisy.
>
>I have checked the coax, antenna balun and antenna leads to dipoles for
>continuity. All are okay and not shorted!
>
>Any suggestions for what the problem could be are most welcome. Oh, the
>higher bands (400-900 MHz) are clean and about the same signal strength
>as the extended whip provides.
>

Sounds to me like a short - probably in the coax connector(s).

[e-mail]
            I'm a Whipple survivor - don't mess with me!



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:40 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.bctel.net!news.mag-net.com!ve7tcp.ampr.org!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Spencer Trombly)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ham-Ant Digest V96 #567
Date: 5 Sep 96 02:02:37 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.94.960904215424.21954A-100000@polaris>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

there are some decent application notes on transmission lines in the
NATIONAL SEMICONDUCTOR interface databook for 1996. Try http://www.
national.com.
I have a GAP DXVIII mounted in a salt marsh. Seems to work well but
dont have anything to compare it to.
73
Spencer Trombly W1GAK




From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:41 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!nntp.newsfirst.com!nntp.crosslink.net!munnari.OZ.AU!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (William J. Wojnar, Jr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: REMOVE
Date: 7 Sep 96 04:32:04 GMT
Organization: Willy's Toy
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

remove ham-digital


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:42 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newspump.sol.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sgi.com!news.goodnet.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Eric Oyen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: FCC Issues NAL
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 1996 18:12:42 GMT
Organization: goodnet.com
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <50n8ia$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: tempe-ts10-9.goodnet.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

The following was received from the FCC Daily Digest for immediate
publication:
******************************************************************************
***********
Daily Digest

Vol. 15 No. 166
September 5, 1996

PHOENIX. AZ.  Issued a further notice of apparent liability in the
amount of $6,000 against Timothy Harold Hoffman, Phoenix, Arizonia,
for violations of various amateur radio rules.  Action by Chief,
Compliance Division, Compliance and Information Bureau.  Adopted:
August 30, 1996 by FNAL.  DA No. 96-1478.  CIB  Internet URL:
index.html

                                                - FCC -




From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:43 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!csn!nntp-xfer-1.csn.net!csn!nntp-xfer-2.csn.net!tali.UCHSC.edu!az736
From: [e-mail] (Marvin L. Jones)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FCC Issues NAL
Date: 10 Sep 1996 13:37:37 GMT
Organization: Denver Free-Net, University of Colorado Health Sciences Center
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <513qv1$[e-mail]>
References: <50n8ia$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet.uchsc.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Eric Oyen ([e-mail]) wrote:
: The following was received from the FCC Daily Digest for immediate
: publication:
: *****************************************************************
: Daily Digest
:
: Vol. 15 No. 166
: September 5, 1996
:
: PHOENIX. AZ.  Issued a further notice of apparent liability in the
: amount of $6,000 against Timothy Harold Hoffman, Phoenix, Arizonia,
: for violations of various amateur radio rules.  Action by Chief,
: Compliance Division, Compliance and Information Bureau.  Adopted:
: August 30, 1996 by FNAL.  DA No. 96-1478.  CIB  Internet URL:
: index.html
:
:                                               - FCC -

Why is this dysfunctional, deviant behaviour being discussed
in rec.radio.amateur.antenna?

--
Marvin L Jones  |  Denver, Colo:    [e-mail]
Jonesy          |  Gunnison, Colo:  [e-mail]
W3DHJ           |  CompuServe:      72103,443
                |  snail-mail:      81230-1371


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:44 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!venger.snds.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (%RSellers%)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need advice on which verticle antenna to buy.
Date: 5 Sep 1996 19:23:15 GMT
Organization: Sundstrand Corporation
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <50n9b3$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aero.snds.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.14

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>Well, I'm finally moving to a home where I can put up a verticle antenna
>with out getting any grief from the xyl.  Now my problem becomes
>deceiding which antenna to get!  I've listed a couple of antennas and
>would like to get any and all comments.
>
>Cushcraft R-7000  10-40m(80 optional)  24or32ft high
>GAP Challenger    2-6-10-12-15-20-40-80m 31.5 ft high
>GAP Titan         10-80m               25ft high
>Hy Gain DX-77     10-40m               29ft high
>Butternut HF9VX   6-80m                26ft high
>Sommer DC280      2-160m (this is a disccone)  26ft high
>
>Thanks a lot, and 73
Please let me kno how you come out. I too am trying to decide on a
verticle. I've narrowed my list down to a Gap Titan, Butternut HF9VX, or
either a Sommer DCL280 or the TCS-50 (50ft vertical). I'm waiting on some
info from Sommer to decide.

73,

Roger Sellers
KB9LBU

email: [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:45 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (JTL100551)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Help need photo
Date: 6 Sep 1996 01:15:32 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 4
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50oc1k$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (JTL100551)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I need a photo of a tubular mast like a Triex or US Tower with a tribander
on it to use for an application to an ACC.  I already have good examples
of lattice type towers, and I have line art of masts, but I need a real
photo. No luck from manufacturer's so far.  Can anyone help?


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:46 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!hunter.premier.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Olijoe)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: je cherche a realiser une antenne pour la bande des 80m
Date: 5 Sep 1996 18:48:54 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 6
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50nlcm$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Olijoe)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

salut , je cherche des plans ( en francais si possible , sinon en anglais
)
pour une antenne emetrice & receptrice sur la bande des 80m

je recherche egalement tout plan d'emeteur/recepteur sur cette meme
frequence


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:47 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!woodybbs!1:106/4267!chris.boone
From: Chris.Boone%1:106/4267 (Chris Boone%1:106/4267)
Date: 04 Sep 96 12:26:04
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: B & W bwd 1.8 - 30  diplole
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-FTN-To: Bob Lewis
Organization: WoodyWare Software, Inc.
Lines: 62

To: Chris Boone%1:106/4267%12:320/100.666
5*** Quoting Bob Lewis to All dated 08-15-96 ***
>
> I once had a B&W dipole and made "side by side" compairisons to a
> dipole.  On 80 and 40 meters the B & W was several S units lower than
> the dipole.  At 20 meters they were about equal.  On 15 and especially
> 10 meters the B & W was a little better in some directions.  Just about
>
> what you would expect when you think about it.
>
> I use it in some commercial installations because it's a simple, good,
> broad-band general purpose antenna.  If you want maximum signal
> however,
> use a resonant antenna like a dipole - or better yet, a single band
> yagi.  It's all a trade-off (convience/performance/$$$$).
>
>
True....the B&W sucks below 10 Mhz compared to a plain dipole....

W8JK showed this in a QST feedback note a few years back also...

The higher gain on 15/12 and 10 are offset by the antenna being HIGHLY
directional with NULLS off the ends (that are DEEP!)...

A single 80 or 160 mtr (if you have space) dipole fed with open line and a
tuner would be MUCH better on all bands than the B&W one....but for ease of
tuning, its hard to beat...but then ANY antenna with a dummy load on  it would

do the same thing!

The balun on a B&W 3.5-30 is a 16:1 balun making the antenna side about
900ohms....the matching network is nothing more than a 600ohm 150 watt
resistor network (thanks to our XRAY machine at work and a resistive/noise
bridge which gaves us the results above)...so if the antenna Z swings from 450

to 1800 ohms, the SWR will never go above 2:1..
but the antenna radiation is NOT that great because at least half of the power
is absorbed in the resistor...(hmmmm sounds like MAXON and its antenna matcher
doesnt it? but theirs was a straight 50ohm load with a balun so the antenna
side was balanced with respect to gnd....)

I own a B&W and personally it has its weaknesses....I prefer to run a FULLWAVE
80 or 160 mtr loop and it works fine on ALL bands without a tuner (less than
3:1 and the performance is MUCH better than the B&W)....fed with 70ohm coax, I
have one set to 80mtrs in the vertical plane mode and the antenna is a diamond
shape with the base 20ft off the gnd...and apex at 100ft....

Works like a champ and SWR is worse at 7.3 Mhz (3:1 just like the book
said!)..but it works great!!!!!

73
Chris
WB5ITT
[e-mail]

 # Origin: WBBS 409-447-HAMS   Conroe/Houston metro! (1:106/4267)

 # Origin: Gateway ARNet <-> HamNet by HB9EBW (12:320/100.666)
--
|Fidonet:  Chris Boone%1:106/4267 2:301/249.666
|Internet: Chris.Boone%1:106/4267
|
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:48 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!woodybbs!106-4267!chris.boone
From: [e-mail] (Chris Boone)
Date: 04 Sep 96 12:26:04
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: B & W bwd 1.8 - 30  diplole
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-FTN-To: Bob Lewis
Organization: WoodyWare Software, Inc.
Lines: 57

5*** Quoting Bob Lewis to All dated 08-15-96 ***
>
> I once had a B&W dipole and made "side by side" compairisons to a
> dipole.  On 80 and 40 meters the B & W was several S units lower than
> the dipole.  At 20 meters they were about equal.  On 15 and especially
> 10 meters the B & W was a little better in some directions.  Just about
>
> what you would expect when you think about it.
>
> I use it in some commercial installations because it's a simple, good,
> broad-band general purpose antenna.  If you want maximum signal
> however,
> use a resonant antenna like a dipole - or better yet, a single band
> yagi.  It's all a trade-off (convience/performance/$$$$).
>
>
True....the B&W sucks below 10 Mhz compared to a plain dipole....

W8JK showed this in a QST feedback note a few years back also...

The higher gain on 15/12 and 10 are offset by the antenna being HIGHLY
directional with NULLS off the ends (that are DEEP!)...

A single 80 or 160 mtr (if you have space) dipole fed with open line and a
tuner would be MUCH better on all bands than the B&W one....but for ease of
tuning, its hard to beat...but then ANY antenna with a dummy load on  it would

do the same thing!

The balun on a B&W 3.5-30 is a 16:1 balun making the antenna side about
900ohms....the matching network is nothing more than a 600ohm 150 watt
resistor network (thanks to our XRAY machine at work and a resistive/noise
bridge which gaves us the results above)...so if the antenna Z swings from 450

to 1800 ohms, the SWR will never go above 2:1..
but the antenna radiation is NOT that great because at least half of the power
is absorbed in the resistor...(hmmmm sounds like MAXON and its antenna matcher
doesnt it? but theirs was a straight 50ohm load with a balun so the antenna
side was balanced with respect to gnd....)

I own a B&W and personally it has its weaknesses....I prefer to run a FULLWAVE
80 or 160 mtr loop and it works fine on ALL bands without a tuner (less than
3:1 and the performance is MUCH better than the B&W)....fed with 70ohm coax, I
have one set to 80mtrs in the vertical plane mode and the antenna is a diamond
shape with the base 20ft off the gnd...and apex at 100ft....

Works like a champ and SWR is worse at 7.3 Mhz (3:1 just like the book
said!)..but it works great!!!!!

73
Chris
WB5ITT
[e-mail]
--
|Fidonet:  Chris Boone 1:106/4267
|Internet: [e-mail]
|
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:49 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!woodybbs!1:106/4267!chris.boone
From: Chris.Boone%1:106/4267 (Chris Boone%1:106/4267)
Date: 04 Sep 96 12:32:30
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Recommendation for a simple 6 M beam
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-FTN-To: Fletcher, Bill J
Organization: WoodyWare Software, Inc.
Lines: 30

To: Chris Boone%1:106/4267%12:320/100.666
5*** Quoting Fletcher, Bill J to All dated 08-21-96 ***
> I would like to build a beam for 6 meters. My requirements are it has
> to be
> simple to build (not the most experienced person in building beam
> antennas)
> and less than 15 feet in length. Thanks in advance for your ideas and
> suggestions.
>
> Bill Fletcher AF9B
> [e-mail]
>
Look an the ARRL Antenna or VHF Handbooks....they have a 4 or 5 el beam for 6
on a 10ft boom...

I built a simple one years ago out of 1/2 conduit and TV clamps...boom was 10f
t
1 1/2 in pipe...a simple gamma match made it all work on 50-51 Mhz!

Chris
WB5ITT

 # Origin: WBBS 409-447-HAMS   Conroe/Houston metro! (1:106/4267)

 # Origin: Gateway ARNet <-> HamNet by HB9EBW (12:320/100.666)
--
|Fidonet:  Chris Boone%1:106/4267 2:301/249.666
|Internet: Chris.Boone%1:106/4267
|
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:50 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!woodybbs!106-4267!chris.boone
From: [e-mail] (Chris Boone)
Date: 04 Sep 96 12:32:30
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Recommendation for a simple 6 M beam
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-FTN-To: Fletcher, Bill J
Organization: WoodyWare Software, Inc.
Lines: 25

5*** Quoting Fletcher, Bill J to All dated 08-21-96 ***
> I would like to build a beam for 6 meters. My requirements are it has
> to be
> simple to build (not the most experienced person in building beam
> antennas)
> and less than 15 feet in length. Thanks in advance for your ideas and
> suggestions.
>
> Bill Fletcher AF9B
> [e-mail]
>
Look an the ARRL Antenna or VHF Handbooks....they have a 4 or 5 el beam for 6
on a 10ft boom...

I built a simple one years ago out of 1/2 conduit and TV clamps...boom was 10f
t
1 1/2 in pipe...a simple gamma match made it all work on 50-51 Mhz!

Chris
WB5ITT
--
|Fidonet:  Chris Boone 1:106/4267
|Internet: [e-mail]
|
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:50 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!woodybbs!9!1:2619/211!robert.casey
From: Robert.Casey%1:2619/211.9 (Robert Casey%1:2619/211.9)
Date: 04 Sep 96 16:20:16
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Improving antenna on cordless phone?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: WoodyWare Software, Inc.
Lines: 22

To: Robert Casey%1:2619/211.9%12:320/100.666
From: [e-mail] (Robert Casey)
Subject: Re: Improving antenna on cordless phone?
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest
)

I have a 49MHz cordless phone and I got better range when I used a cliplead
cliped to the base's antenna and wrapped the cliplead twisted around the
incomming phone line wire.  I also formed a small choke coil in the phone wire
right at the connector at the base unit so I wouldn't "short" out the RF
signal from the base's antenna to it's ground.  The power lead running
to the base's plug-in powerpack would form the other leg of a crude "dipole"
antenna, or more accurately the ground wire for a random wire antenna.

 # Origin: Usenet:Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241 (1:2619/211.9
)

 # Origin: Gateway ARNet <-> HamNet by HB9EBW (12:320/100.666)
--
|Fidonet:  Robert Casey%1:2619/211.9 2:301/249.666
|Internet: Robert.Casey%1:2619/211.9
|
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:52 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!nntp.wwwi.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.myriad.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Lightning protection for vertical
Date: 6 Sep 1996 07:33:37 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 63
Message-ID: <50ok4h$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr15s7.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
>Hi all. I'm playing around with vertical antennas at the in-laws' cottage and
>having a great time. It is a full 1/4 l on 30m up 15' with 6 roof-mounted
>counterpoises. In an A/B test with a 100' flat-top up 30' with tuned lines th
e
>other op gave the vertical a 579, but the flat-top 449. The noise is certainl
y
>worse, though - just like the books say.
>
>An ideal ground gives 36 ohms = around 1.5:1 SWR. Anything worse should
>lower the SWR. The roof made of metal plates bolted together, though, so I
>though it would be pretty hot.

Simple solution.  GROUND the antenna to the metal roof.  SOLID ground.  Then
use a gamma match section to match the coax to the antenna.  At that point,
who cares what the impedance was?  Your SWR meter will be so low when
you are done it won't even move off the peg.....

>There are some metal object that come up out of the roof; could they change t
he
>reactance of the ant?

Sure....  depending on how tall they are and how far away they are!


>2. Is the additional noise on a vertical ant caused by vert. polarized atmosp
heric
>noise, or just man-made? This is up at the cottage, so I'm surprised if it's
the
>latter.

You may find out that when everything is solid grounded, the noise is no worse

than your dipole.  It is true that man-made noise, for me, has been more
often than not more vetically polarized.  My four element all grounded phased
arrays are built this way and they are remarkably quite.  However, I am in
a very isolated country location, which means very low noise anyway.

>3. I'm thinking of putting this ant on the roof of our apt. building 11 stori
es up.
>I'm on the 10th floor now, so the cable run would be short. but I'm really wo
rried
>about lightning strikes. Can anyone point me to a practical guide to making t
his
>really safe. I did the sensible thing and looked up G. Coffman's posts in
>DejaNews, but I could find none with this specific info (still, I learned a *
lot*
>about lightning!)

If you go about the process of solid grounding it to the roof, then feeding it

in gamma match as I suggested, that will go a LONG way to helping protect
you.  Whether or not your building owner will appreciate the added lightning
rod on his building is another matter!

Once you switch to shunt fed all grounded operation, that gives you a solid
chance to really put the various coaxial lighting protectors to work.  If
you do the proper job of grounding them, then a similar job of protection
at the point where the cable enters your apartment, you will have done about
all you can do to help yourself, as I understand it all.

Appropriate information sure does exist in the PolyPhasor handbook with the
title "The Grounds for Lighting", or something like that.  For the $9 or so
they want for it post paid, it will be a VERY worth while handbook for you.

They, as well as others make very good protection devices.

In your case, you'd be smart to study what they say and consider my
suggestion on shunt fed.  It has saved me a LOT of money...

Mike @ W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:53 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Lightning protection for vertical
Date: 7 Sep 1996 02:42:14 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 24
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50r5g6$[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 Tom, is the word "noise" only applied to EM waves? At my QTH, I had
>a lot of trouble with ionized electrical interference until I changed
>over to insulated wire for my antenna. (Ever notice that static is not
>static? :-)

I said:

Once "noise" travels a small distance is an electromagnetic wave EXACTLY
like the electromagnetic you are trying to hear. Unless the noise
originates in the antenna system or is directly coupled to (via wiring)
the antenna, the feed system will make absolutely no difference at all in.
If the noise is half a block or a hundred miles away, only antenna
directivity will make a difference.

If "noise" comes from direct coupling to the antenna, THEN the antenna
gender can make a change. Your static orignated IN the antenna system.

If the noise originated even a small distance away,  insulation would have
made no difference.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:55 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!spool.mu.edu!newspump.sol.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (K1BQT)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: FRACTAL DIPOLE
Date: 7 Sep 1996 11:12:12 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 57
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <50s3cc$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (K1BQT)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hi Tom--

To answer some of your questions concerning the  Cohen fractal dipole I
built:

1.  I used identical cables (RG8M, same length, same connector).

2. VSWR of the fractal was just under 1.5:1 @ 146.85, reference antenna
was flat.  Good point, however.  Just to make sure, I tried it again this
AM with a 3-dB pad inline. Same results (-3dBm).

3.  Balun was a 4:1 transmission-line type, #22 wound on a T50-6 form.
Not the best--but adequate.

4.  With feedline 36" out and dropping to the ground from center
elevation, I didn't notice any strong tendency toward patterning (perhaps
a dB or so of directivity).  I did move the feed around--naturally, as it
come closer into the near field, it had progressively greater impact on
signal strength.  Incidentally, the feed had some beads installed in
addition to the balun--there was no measurable common-mode present.  I
realize this type of measurement is tricky--this is why I tried several
different antenna spots and even a couple different repeaters.  Generally,
my approach is to move the reference antenna around within a small area
for maximum signal (best capture), then move the DUT in the same way.
This way, I can observe the BEST that antenna can deliver within--say--a
3-foot box.  Usually both antennas end up in exactly the same spot.

5.  My "groundplane" has been varified against a carefully constructed and
decoupled reference dipole.  It has a lot of droop--and is really more of
a feedline-decoupled 1/2-wave vertical than a classic groundplane.  It
appears to perform virtually the same as a vertical dipole--but is alot
easier to use when making vertical antenna comparisons.

6.  The groundplane counterpoise and Cohen fractal dipole are made from #8
Radioshack solid-aluminum ground wire.  The top of the groundplane is
5/16" aluminum thinwall.

As far as other observations go, I would say that the physical structure
of the fractal dipole is probably impractical unless it is being used at a
frequency where it could be stamped from sheet aluminum or etched onto a
pc board.  Also, it DOES require external matching for use in a 50-Ohm
system (added expense)--and its low feedpoint resistance suggests that
wire losses could become quite significant at low frequencies.  I know it
isn't kosher to equate feedpoint resistance with radiation resistance, but
I can't see how radiation resistance can be that high in a near-full-sized
antenna with a feedpoint resistnace on the order of 10 Ohms.  Perhaps you
could explain how this might happen?

Having said that, I think the main value of this experiment was to bring
some real-world perspective to what we are discussing.  Some of the design
points being made equate to barely-discernable performance differences
(1dB) rather than rubber-ducky vs. yagi leaps in performance.  In fairness
to Chip, I think this needs to be said.

-- Rick




From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:56 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Modeling Software
Date: 12 Sep 1996 07:59:01 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 12
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <518tu5$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com


I have not used one individual's software, because when I called to ask
him about it sometime back, he got annoyed and was unhelpful. He missed a
B-i-G sale to an institution.

My personal favorites are EZNEC (and EZNEC-M) by W7EL. EXCELLENT graphics!
Paragon's new stuff is also very good, but a little less intuitive to work
through; but this may be a subjective difference. Both use the NEC2
engine.

There are other companies that don't advertise to hams which I can find
for you if needed.


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:57 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!snunews.snu.ac.kr!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!news.postech.ac.kr!news.dacom.co.kr!arclight.uoregon.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!spool.mu.edu!newspump.sol.net!news.inc.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-8.sprintlink.net!galaxy.cybergate.net!dhayes
From: [e-mail] (Dwight R. Hayes, Jr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Design Software
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 96 19:12:44 GMT
Organization: Ross Analytical Services, Inc.
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <517385$[e-mail]>
References: <516sj9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: clv-shv1-39.cyberdrive.net
X-Newsreader: News Xpress 2.0 Beta #0

Please Post Responses to Usenet - others would be interested (At least,
myself).

In article <516sj9$[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>Does anyone know if their are any low cost or shareware programs that would
> allow you
>to model / design various antenna constructions ?  73 WEP


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 12 16:33:57 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!spool.news.idt.net!dxthree
From: [e-mail] (Noel Henderson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Need resource for calculations
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 96 17:46:51 GMT
Organization: Noel Henderson
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <519ic1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-46.ts-1.hou.idt.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: News Xpress 2.0 Beta #2
Keyword: distance bearing caluculations

I am looking for a text or other documents that will help me understand how to

calculate distance and bearing for antennas(?ae?). With a give lat & lon for
two site, I need to know where to point each antenna, and how high I need to
be. Anyone know any good books on the subject?

Thanks
Noel Henderson
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:19 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.megalink.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.monmouth.com!news
From: Robert Bissett <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: "capture area"?
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 02:05:52 -0400
Organization: Nov Schmoz Kapop
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp23.monmouth.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)
To: Monty Wilson <[e-mail]>

Monty Wilson wrote:
>
> In working with quad and loop skywire antennas, and in reading
> what others have said about loops in general, there is usually
> a statement that, given the perimeter of a loop antenna (for
> example, a full wave at the design frequency), it will perform
> better if a shape is chosen which maximizes the area enclosed
> in the loop.
>
> So I derived the area enclosed by polygons of a given perimeter
> but of various numbers of equal-length sides, expressed
> as a percentage of the area of a circle with a circumference
> equal to the said perimeter:
>
> Sides           Percentage of circle area
>
> 3               61%
> 4               79%
> 6               84%
> 8               95%
> (inf)          100%
>
> It seems strange to me that we should pick up only 5% of
> the theoretical max area going from 4 to 6 sides, but an
> additional 11% going from 6 to 8.
>
> Anyway, does anyone know if there is really anything to
> all this "capture area" business?  Is there any evidence
> or computer simulations to support the idea?  Does it
> affect horizontally-oriented loops (skywires) as well as
> vertically-oriented ones?
>
> If anyone knows about this, please tell me.  Thanks and 73
> --
> .........Monty.
> [e-mail]

The best explanation I have seen for capture area is in Kraus (W8JK)'s
 book "Antennas" in most technical library collections and currently
still in print. My copy is loaned out so I don't have the publisher
info.

Bob ND2L
--
      *********
Bob Bissett      [e-mail]
      *********


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:22 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!spool.mu.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx27-12
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: "capture area"?
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 96 05:50:44 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <51qmt9$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <51q7va$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx27-12.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <51q7va$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrot
e:
>In article <[e-mail]>, Monty Wilson
><[e-mail]> writes:
>
>>Anyway, does anyone know if there is really anything to
>>all this "capture area" business?
>
>There's not much to it if you really mean capture area. Capture area is
>not directly related to the physical size of an antenna, so making one
>bigger can actually make capture area less. It's all what we do with the
>current in the radiator that counts, so there is no simple general answer.
>The question would have to deal with a specific case.
>
>Capture area relates only to gain and efficiency, not physical size.
>
>73 Tom

Yes, it's simply another way of stating gain. If you could keep the losses to
an
insignificantly small amount, the capture area of an infinitesimally short
dipole would be nearly as large as that of a half wavelength dipole because th
e
gain difference is less than 1/2 dB. If the antenna is directional, the captur
e
area is different depending on which direction you view the antenna from --
for the same reason that the gain is different in different directions.

So, yes, there's something to it. But maybe not what a lot of people think.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:23 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!tezcat!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!news
From: [e-mail] (W6KKT Jesse)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: "Sommer DJ2UT XP-70 Beams"???
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 15:18:20 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 4
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dyn5.frazmtn.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/16.227

Help: Anyone have any information pro/con concerning the "Sommer
DJ2UT" beams?  Would really like call letters of stations that use
them.
73, Jesse, W6KKT


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:24 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!netnews.fast.net!news.fast.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news3.near.net!yale!news-mail-gateway!daemon
From: Kevin Muenzler <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 10-30 METER  ANTENNAS
Date: 18 Sep 1996 10:11:59 -0400
Organization: Yale CS Mail/News Gateway
Lines: 29
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: babyblue.cs.yale.edu

-n3tvv <[e-mail]> writes (loudly!):
-WHAT WOULD BE MY BEST BET FOR 10-30 METER ANTENNA?OMNIDIRECTIONAL,OR A
-BEAM ? I AM LIMITED TO SIZE AND SPACE,ALTHOUGH I PREFER OMNI , I`M
-VERY LIMITED BEAM WISE. I  HAVE A BUTTERNUT BUTTERFLY,BUT I`VE HEARD ABOUT
-TOO MANY PROBLEMS WITH THEM.

-WOULD IT BE WORTH PUTTING UP,OR SHOULD I JUST GET SOMETHING ELSE?

-                                ERIC BOTT
-                               ([e-mail])

Well Eric,
Your easiest and least obtrusive antenna would be a vertical.
I am using a 1/4 wave 40-meter vertical that has elements for
30, 20, and 10.  It is useable as a 3/4 wave on 15.  All I did
was erect the vertical, 1 inch copper water pipe, and place
the other verticals directly along side.  The separation is
about six inches from the main element.  They are connected
to the main element at the bottom and insulated from it by
plexi-glass spacers every five feet or so.  It works just
like a multi-band dipole antenna.  The elements for the other
bands are of 3/16-inch copper tubing.
This could easily be done with a vertical for 30-meters and
elements for the other bands.  A 30-meter vertical will not
quite work as a 3/4 vertical for 10, it is just a bit too
long, so you would have to have elements for 20, 15, and 10.
Hope this helps, let me know if you need detail plans.

Kevin, WB5RUE


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:25 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.ultranet.com!homer.alpha.net!usenet
From: scott <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 160M dipole shortened...How to ?
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 11:10:14 -0700
Organization: Aero Head Aviation
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp25.westby.mwt.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; U)

Is there a handy formula to calculate how much inductance to add to a
160M dipole so that it is resonant and only about 130 feet in length?
Also, where is the best and easiest place to put the loading coils in
each leg?

Alternatively, I could put up a full wavelength horizontal loop for 160M
if the shape can be pie shaped and/or irregular, i.e., attaching it to
the various trees around the yard.  Is there any  restriction on shape?
WWould the impedance be close to 50 Ohms or would I need to make a
matching section out of 75 Ohm coax, etc. ?

All Info APPRECIATED !

Scott, N0EDV


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:26 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!enews.sgi.com!news.uoregon.edu!news.ironhorse.com!sloth.swcp.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Brian Mileshosky, N5ZGT)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2m 440 mhz
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 03:29:16 GMT
Organization: Southwest Cyberport
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <51l5ph$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp123.swcp.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55

Andy Mayer <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Looking for a quick n' easy to make 2 meter/ 440 mhz antenna.  Best idea
>so far is a dual band J-pole, just looking to see if there was anything
>else.

If you don't mind two seperate antennas, groudplanes for both bands
will work! Good luck.
Best of 73,
Brian, N5ZGT





 _________________________________________________________________________
   Boy Scouts of America                 Amateur Radio - N5ZGT
    Eagle Scout - 1996            ARRL   QRP: NorCal# 1700   QRP-L# 580
     JASM - Troop 41           Author of Worldradio's "Youth Forum" Column
    Albuquerque, N.M.            Packet: N5ZGT @ KC5IZT.ALBQ.NM.USA.NA
  O.A. Lodge 66  <-W-W-W-<<             Internet: [e-mail]
 _________________________________________________________________________




From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:27 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!demos!news1.relcom.ru!EU.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (EricF3E)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 6 meter homebrew ant.
Date: 12 Sep 1996 16:13:57 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 5
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <519qu5$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (EricF3E)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Looking for info on how to construct a "in the rafters" 6 M antenna for FM
voice.
Thanks

KE6BBA


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:28 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde.nde.swri.edu!nntp.primenet.com!enews.sgi.com!news.uoregon.edu!news.ironhorse.com!sloth.swcp.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Brian Mileshosky, N5ZGT)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: ==> WANT: HyGain Tape Measure Antenna <==
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 22:04:57 GMT
Organization: Southwest Cyberport
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <51n75c$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp130.swcp.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24231 rec.radio.swap:72840 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:32393

Hello Eveybody,
  I am looking for a HyGain tape measure dipole antenna.  This antenna
is actually two tape measure built into one piece, including the
feedpoint.  All you do is pull out the apporopriate amount of tape to
operate on your frequecny, and you are on the air!
  If you, or anybody you know, has one of these antennas for sale,
please E-Mail me as I am interested in taking it off your hands!
  Thank!
72/73,
Brian, N5ZGT


 _________________________________________________________________________
   Boy Scouts of America                 Amateur Radio - N5ZGT
    Eagle Scout - 1996            ARRL   QRP: NorCal# 1700   QRP-L# 580
     JASM - Troop 41           Author of Worldradio's "Youth Forum" Column
    Albuquerque, N.M.            Packet: N5ZGT @ KC5IZT.ALBQ.NM.USA.NA
  O.A. Lodge 66  <-W-W-W-<<             Internet: [e-mail]
 _________________________________________________________________________




From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:29 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!not-for-mail
From: Gene Shablygin <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Actie antenna noise canceller
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 03:41:19 -0500
Organization: Jet Info Systems International, Inc.
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <50v3dm$[e-mail]> <516eau$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: pool041.max1.dallas.tx.dynip.alter.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U)
To: W8JI Tom <[e-mail]>

Dear Tom,

How can you suggest to use this gadget in my case:

I have 2 major sources of noise: my computers (if I ise a short piece of
wire as an indoor antenna, I have 9+20 on every HF band); but as soon as
I use proper grounding, this local (in-shack) noise does not interfere
with
my radio.

The same time, I have a lot of industrial noises around my shack (from
Texas
Instruments, Rockwell and God knows from whom else). Without a nois
blanker,
I have 9+10 at least on 20; noise blanker (I in both my FT-1000MP and
Drake R7a)
downs this level to S-7 (still to much).

How can I use the noise canceller to get rid of industrial noise, but
not
in-shack computer generated noise??

73

Gene AB5GY/RA3AA

W8JI Tom wrote:

> The beauty of phased cancellation is this.
>
> If the noise sense antenna hears the noise signal very loudly, and no
> other signals or noises, you can subtract out every bit of noise with no
> detrimental effects.
>
> If the noise antenna hears a new noise the main antenna does not, the
> noise antenna will ADD the new noise it hears to the system.
>
> It works by subtracting the two signals, in order to subtract the very
> same noise source noise must clearly appear on the noise antenna.
>
> It will generally only subtract ONE noise source at a time, but the noise
> can be any bandwith or duty cycle without problem. For example, on the AM
> broadcast band you can subtract out a local station from well over S-9 to
> S-0. It works perfectly even on the audio. The entire station, carrier
> audio and all just disappears.
>
> 73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:30 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!metro.atlanta.com!cpk-news-feed3.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Demccurdy)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: ADDING THIRD ELEMENT TO CUSHCRAFT 40-2CD
Date: 14 Sep 1996 07:04:05 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 7
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <51e3f5$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Demccurdy)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

HAS ANYONE EXTENTED THE BOOM AND ADDED A THIRD ELEMENT TO THE CUSHCRAFT 2
EL 40M YAGI?

I AM LOOKING FOR DIMENSIONAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE UPGRADE.  I AM WILLING
TO TRY A FEW DESIGNS BUT WOULD PLACE EMPHASIS ON MAXIMUM GAIN WITH
BANDWIDTH OF 200 KHZ..



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:31 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!EU.net!Norway.EU.net!nntp.uio.no!nntp.uib.no!nntp-bergen.UNINETT.no!nntp-trd.UNINETT.no!news-b.uni-c.dk!news.uni-c.dk!cph-1.news.DK.net!dkuug!dknet!funny.bahnhof.se!seunet!news2.swip.net!mn6.swip.net!mn5.swip.net!news
From: Maude Schyffert <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: ADDING THIRD ELEMENT TO CUSHCRAFT 40-2CD
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 18:03:44 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <51e3f5$[e-mail]> <51c697$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup120-6-4.swipnet.se
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-User: s-12444
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b6Gold (Win16; I)

> I think you have to go to a full size 40 on a 36' or longer boom to
> improve the performance enough to be worth it...its just too hard to
> add gain with loaded elements!
>
Agree, it's here where size makes the differens.

M


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:31 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-5.sprintlink.net!voskovec.radio.cz!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde.nde.swri.edu!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ycc.yale.edu!yale!news-mail-gateway!daemon
From: "randy x4dow" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Advice on trimming elements to tune an antenna
Date: 14 Sep 1996 12:57:25 -0400
Organization: Yale CS Mail/News Gateway
Lines: 22
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: babyblue.cs.yale.edu

     Sorry about the repost--I left out the subject in the first one . . .

     I recently picked up a couple of ~170 MHz HTs and (from a different sourc
e)
     an antenna. I would like to trim the antenna elements to optimize
     performance (transmit and receive) specifically for the 170 MHz frequency
.

     The antenna has one vertical element and four equally spaced horizontal
     (90 degrees to vertical) elements. The lengths of the elements are:
     Horizontals - about 15 inches, Vertical about 30 inches. All elements are

     thin whips. There is a coax feed off the bottom of the body that the
     elements are attached to. The antenna is outdoors, on the roof, and is fe
d
     with RG-58.

     Specifically, my question is: Is this antenna tuned for 170 MHz? If not,
     what should the length of the elements be?

     Any suggestions would be appreciated.

     Thanks.

     R. K. Dow



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:34 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!hunter.premier.net!news1.erols.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!Norway.EU.net!oslonett.no!sn.no!nntp-oslo.UNINETT.no!nntp-trd.UNINETT.no!news.uni-c.dk!cph-1.news.DK.net!dkuug!dknet!funny.bahnhof.se!seunet!news2.swip.net!mn6.swip.net!mn5.swip.net!news
From: Maude Schyffert <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: ANC-4 Noise Canceller
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 14:36:59 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup97-2-16.swipnet.se
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-User: ca371ac9c2b9db57d345c213928e7f29
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b6Gold (Win16; I)

Hi,

I've tried one ANC-4 now but the resault was not good. The noise I have
comes from various thyrisor controlled ventilators. I only used indoor
antennas for the ANC-4 and it seemd to me that the noise icreased....

I have one idea to put up a mobile whip near to the normal Hf-antenna
and maybee use attenuator for the whip. However living in down-town
Stockholm in an apartment house makes things more complicated. I intend
to use the VHF coax with a duplex filter for the whip so I have to get
the filters first...

One more thing, if JPS reads this, I work mainly PACTOR, G-TOR and that
meas fast swiching and the .5 sec time to go to receive is far to long.
This can probably be cure easily but I do not have any diagram of the
ANC-4, could that be something for JPS to install, maybee with a swich
for long (ssb) ant short (cw and digital) delay.

Anyone with comments ????  Have you used a mobile whip ????

Maude  / SM0BKZ


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:35 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.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 Analyzers
Date: 13 Sep 1996 06:26:24 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 15
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <51b156$[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:

>Cecil Moore wrote:
> If one had a special Smith chart with |Z|
> plotted around the outside circle or across the bottom, one could
> read the complex impedance directly from the Smith chart as the
> function is single-valued for either the upper half or the lower
> half of the chart ***for any single, unique value of SWR***.

Actually you can switch in a fixed value of R and measure the change and
compute the real and imaginary parts. You just wouldn't know the sign
unless you moved the frequency a tad.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:36 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.cdsnet.net!news.magicnet.net!news.supernet.net!news.thenet.net!news.kei.com!news.texas.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-11.sprintlink.net!news.indy.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Occolowitz John)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Design Software
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 06:05:16 GMT
Organization: IndyNet - Indys Internet Gateway ([e-mail])
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <51fut3$[e-mail]>
References: <516sj9$[e-mail]> <517385$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip79.slip.indy.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Dwight R. Hayes, Jr.) wrote:

>Please Post Responses to Usenet - others would be interested (At least,
>myself).

>In article <516sj9$[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>Does anyone know if their are any low cost or shareware programs that would
>> allow you
>>to model / design various antenna constructions ?  73 WEP

If you have the QRZ CD-ROM you can copy Ya and yagim311 from the disk.
Both use DOS to model single yagis. Additionally yagim311 will give
patterns for stacked yagis under the assumption that there is no
interaction. I have used them both and the results are quite similar.



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:37 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!news.itd.umich.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Steve Parus)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna rotor :  durable,  mail order sources ?
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 15:29:32 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <51js2b$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sp1pc4541.chem.lsa.umich.edu
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

It was suggested to me to ask ham radio folks for suggestions
regarding an antenna rotor for television and FM radio usage.  I'm
looking for something that will be durable and last.  Local tv shops
carry one by ChannelMaster for about $75.  Is there something else
worth considering in that price range ?  How about mail order sources
for such items ?  (I already know of the MECI catalog for quad
shielded RG-6/U at 0.14 cents/ft).  Thanks,


[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:38 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!news.cybercom.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (The SuperSport)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna rotor :  durable,  mail order sources ?
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 01:32:30 GMT
Organization: Cyber Access Internet Services [phone]
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <51q7q6$[e-mail]>
References: <51js2b$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mfd-dial3-22.cybercom.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.55

I went through the problem of "killing" those typical Radio Shack type
rotors.  Finally I purchased one from THE HAM OUTLET store in Salem,
NH on RT. 28, of whom does mail orders.  I have had this rotor unit
for 3 years, this sucker is built.

It is a HD-73-1 made by Alliance.  It is a dual speed w/electric brake
and brake release torquing cam for high winds.


[e-mail]
http://www.eb101.com


>It was suggested to me to ask ham radio folks for suggestions
>regarding an antenna rotor for television and FM radio usage.  I'm
>looking for something that will be durable and last.  Local tv shops
>carry one by ChannelMaster for about $75.  Is there something else
>worth considering in that price range ?  How about mail order sources
>for such items ?  (I already know of the MECI catalog for quad
>shielded RG-6/U at 0.14 cents/ft).  Thanks,


>[e-mail]





From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:39 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.insinc.net!scanner.worldgate.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!scnews.sc.intel.com!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 09:30:02 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <515thu$[e-mail]> <518b67$[e-mail]> <51avan$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: camoore-desk.ch.intel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

WB3U wrote:
> I will also say that in the real world, the statement is
> entirely valid.  It is necessary... to the ability to bury coax
> without incurring loss.

Hi Jack, If we have currents flowing on the outside of the shield,
won't we incur losses if we bury it? Seems to me, unless the fields
cancel because of perfectly balanced currents, we would incur losses.

73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:40 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!mr.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: 15 Sep 1996 02:52:57 GMT
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <51fr29$[e-mail]>
References: <51avan$[e-mail]> <51d7pl$[e-mail]> <51en91$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <51ev6j$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 48.phoenix-1.az.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22ATT (Windows; U; 16bit)

[e-mail] (WB3U) wrote:
>If you could spin the magnet pole-over-pole at a rate of
>7 million times a second, do you think it would still
>pick up the nail?

Hi Jack, I don't know the answer. But I'll try to find the
correct gear ratio and let you know.

73, Cecil, W6RCA




From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:41 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.accessone.com!news.cstone.net!newshost.cyberramp.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!news.uoregon.edu!csulb.edu!news.sgi.com!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 96 17:48:47 GMT
Organization: Not Enough
Lines: 22
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <51hg0r$[e-mail]>
References: <51avan$[e-mail]> <51d7pl$[e-mail]> <51en91$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <51ev6j$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Peter Markham) wrote:

>   It is extremely difficult, and at times disheartening, to
>sift through the various discussions concerning basic concepts,
>and have to decide what is bs and what is not. A layman, as
>such, is likely not to have the mental tools, or the solid
>foundation in physics to decide what is fact and what is
>fiction. I know I have trouble, often.

Tom, this is EXACTLY the danger in the "through the shield"
theory.  Continued support of this supposedly simpler
concept (which you've agreed is wrong) will do far more
damage to those who wish to learn than the truth ever could.

>     Relative to concepts and mental pictures; keep them
>sufficiently detailed so that they do not foster simple,
>apparent contradictions.

I couldn't agree more.  Thanks for your comments, Pete.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:42 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsfeeder.servtech.com!news1.io.org!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.teleport.com!netaxs.com!news1.erols.com!hunter.premier.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: 15 Sep 1996 18:01:25 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 14
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <51hubl$[e-mail]>
References: <51ev6j$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <51ev6j$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>
>If you could spin the magnet pole-over-pole at a rate of
>7 million times a second, do you think it would still
>pick up the nail?
>
>73,
>Jack  WB3U

Bad test, it wouldn't pick up the nail even without the "shield", it would
repel it!



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:43 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 96 06:57:44 GMT
Organization: Not Enough
Lines: 21
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <51iu87$[e-mail]>
References: <51en91$[e-mail]> <51hubn$[e-mail]> <51ip7r$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

       [e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
  >[e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:

>> . . . If a cable is brought to two terminations at each end,
>>one for the center and one for the shield at each end, and you
>>insert a vector ammeter in each line, if the phase is 180 degrees
>>out and the currents equal the line will not radiate.

>Agreed, except the current/phase relationship you've described
>isn't conditional in coax.  The currents will always be equal
>and opposite.

I think my reply here was not as clear as it should have
been.  The presence of unequal currents at the load does not
mean currents within the coax itself are unequal, nor does it
mean the shield will radiate from the inside out.  In other
words, although I agree with Tom's statement, it doesn't
directly address the issues we have been discussing.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:43 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!EU.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: 17 Sep 1996 11:08:28 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 17
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <51metc$[e-mail]>
References: <51lhfc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <51lhfc$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>
>Does this mean that if I approach a nail with a 7 MHz
>electromagnetic source, the nail will move out of the way?
>
>73,
>Jack  WB3U

Yes, if the nail is light enough or the field intense enough. It
absolutely repels the nail.

You can build a wattmeter that way, and it will work if your amplifier is
big enough.  :-)

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:44 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!news
From: [e-mail] (W6KKT Jesse)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 15:57:54 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 42
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <51hdjb$[e-mail]> <51icqc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dyn18.frazmtn.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/16.227

On 15 Sep 1996 22:08:12 -0400, [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:


>
>
>
>One of my "jobs" is troubleshooting equipment designs that other engineers
>produce. Last Friday, I looked at a UHF TV transmitting PA that came to me
>with a complaint of instability and changes in performance with lengths of
>external cables.
>
>The PA had an internal coaxial cable soldered to the large groundplane of
>a board near the output combiner, the cable ran to an N connector mounted
>on the back panel of the PA. The less than perfect RF ground at the
>combiner resulted in common mode excitation of the cable, and this excited
>the N connectors less than perfect ground.
>Any feedline connected to the N connector radiated, so changing the length
>of the external cable changed the power output and distortion of the video
>signal.
>
>"Cures" could be the addition of a sleeve over the cable, making the cable
>an odd multiple of 1/4 wl between the back panel and the combiner,
>improving "grounds" at the cabinet and/ or combiner, and so on. The best
>cure is the one that does the job in a simple manner and is repeatable.
>
>This was a classic case of the feedline NOT being excited with equal and
>opposite currents, and a problem directly caused by a condition you say
>can't be "forced".
>
>Around 1980 Oak Industries, after spending hundreds of hours trying to
>understand sound bars on video of a sine wave scrambled TV system, was led
>to an F connector mounted to the back panel of a CATV decoder. The
>mounting location induced unequal currents on the CATV line feeding the
>descrambler, and made the incoming line part of a frequency selective load
>that converted the normal FM modulation into AM shift of the aural
>carrier. The sine wave decoder read this shift as a de-scrambling signal
>for the video, and modulated the video with black bars that moved around
>as the audio was changed.
>
>Hi Tom, how did you determine the currents on the INSIDE of the cable feeding
the defective F connector were not equal and 180 degrees out of phase?
73, Jesse, W6KKT


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:46 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.net66.com!jolt.pagesat.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!news.forth.gr!news-ath.forthnet.gr!news-the.forthnet.gr!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Group Organ )
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: beam ant, project:Yr advice pls
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 17:23:46 GMT
Organization: ME!!!!!
Lines: 62
Sender: [e-mail]
Distribution: world
Expires: 10 days
Message-ID: <51mmgl$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: talos.spark.net.gr
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82



Dear friends


I have a big doubt so I post this masage here

   First lemme tell you my system configuration fr the moment before I
   advise you my problem :
   I use a SONY ICF 7600D , a Lowe HF150 and a Philips Magnavox 2395
   all are digital
   - wire antennas - of 6m sloped 60 deg paralel to az 120 deg - and a
   hor wire 13 m [aralel to 15 deg az .Both are  TV antenna mast
guides
   -home brewn ATU operating 2- 7 mHz for 20 - 5 dB respectively
   Palce of Reception ; Thessaloniki 40N 23E

   Due to my interest in SEA  I have the particular interest for
   listening to the folowing radio stations and under the condidtions
   as below :

   - STM / V o Malaysia ( dir 120 dg az) in 15295 at mean levels of 2-
   3 with QRMers as
   R Liberty  fgrom 15290  at levels S4-5 ( abt 15-25 dB more)
   R F I  from 15300 at nearly same as R L
   from varius hand made account-ments I understood that a great
   amount of signal abt 50-60% is lost due to possible reflexions
   coming from the city's mountains at an angle of 270-025 deg az

-RRI Jakarta in 9680  at mean levels (not always receivable) of S1-2
   Only V of Turkey is QRMer at 9675 but not always QRMing due to very
   low mod

- R Singapore  in 6000 at mean levels  of S2to 3 with
   Deutschlandfunk in 6005 (S4) as the only QRMer or sometimes
   Radio Dubai at 6000  but at verylow level

   I asked  the experts  of my city for making a common antenna
constru
   ction for  these 3 freqs of a antenna individual per band , I also
   read  many boks abt antennas found solutions  but most of them  are
un-
   suitable  for  my  place ( they were quad - X beam  for example) as
I
   have minimal  room in  the 7  level building and possibly can use
only
   small constructions  of  no more than 4 x 4 sqm

   PLease help me , and suggest a good protype fr beam antenna(s)
under
   the above conditions
   Thank you in advance

   [e-mail]
PLEASE ADIVSE ME YOUR OPINIONS BY EMAIL ONLY !

======
test for 8-bit
µß≈ß±Θß≥ δΘ▄πΩß≥
Zakaria Liang!
(namanya untuk kawan sahaja!)



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:46 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-5.sprintlink.net!voskovec.radio.cz!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!night.primate.wisc.edu!newsspool.doit.wisc.edu!news.doit.wisc.edu!news
From: [e-mail] (Jason Hanson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Best spot to mount ant on a Nissan Sentra?
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 16:09:23 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin, Madison
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <51c2ep$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: 144.92.209.51
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

I would like to put an NMO mount on my 1996 Nissan Sentra.  What would
be the best place?  Would drilling though the trunk deck provide a
good enough ground?  How about one of those trunk brackets?



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:47 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde.nde.swri.edu!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (PTracy)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best spot to mount ant on a Nissan Sentra?
Date: 14 Sep 1996 07:31:53 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 38
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <51e539$[e-mail]>
References: <51c2ep$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <51c2ep$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Jason Hanson) writes:

>I would like to put an NMO mount on my 1996 Nissan Sentra.  What would
>be the best place?

Speaking from experiance, smack dab in the middle of the roof is the BEST
spot.  Period.

>Would drilling though the trunk deck provide a
>good enough ground?

Also speaking from experiance,  sort of.  A good ground, but a lousey
ground plane. This would be a second choice if drilling a hole in the roof
was out of the question for whatever reason.  Most of the police cars I
put antennas in use the trunk as the location for the antenna.  The light
bars could interfere with the antenna in a roof mount setup.  Although, I
see today that the LOJACK antenns are roof mouted on the cruisers around
here.

>How about one of those trunk brackets?

Last choice.  I assume you're talking about the 'TRUNK LIP MOUNTS' that
attach to the forward lip of the trunk.  It was many years ago when I was
in 2 way radio, and back then all the trunk lip mounts used steel.  They
were ok for a while, but eventually the plating would wear off, the
setscrews would becom corroded, the paint would eventually chip, and in
general, they sucked.  The coax would also eventually chafe through,
exposing the braid to the elements.  Yech.  Ptoooy.  There was also a fold
down trunk mount that allowed you to stow the antenna in the trunk when
you weren't using it or parked.  I didn't like these because of the
questionable grounding (or lack of it) through the hinge, and they kinda
thrashed around in the baggage area.  Those mounts also required drilling
somewhere in the sheet metal, usually in locations where water collected.
A real rust generator.  KAKA.  But, the customer is always right.  Give
'em what they want.

KE1C - Pat


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:48 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!csulb.edu!drivel.ics.uci.edu!news.service.uci.edu!unogate!mvb.saic.com!news.cerf.net!ent-img.com!wb6hqk!bart
From: [e-mail] (Bart Rowlett)
Subject: Re: beverage matching?
Organization: wb6hqk
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <50dohs$[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 17:33:13 GMT
Lines: 28

In article <50dohs$[e-mail]>, bob puharic <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Much has been written about proper impedance matching for beverages to
>ensure that the all the received signal is fed to the rx. However, one
>question: is this necessary?

Usually.

> Since HF is inherently noisy, and we need
>to maximize S/N ratio,  does matching do any good? if the signal is
>low qrn, then S/N will be high. if qrn is high, then matching will
>just feed high qrn to the rx....comments?

In the case of most HF antennas efficient enough for transmitting, you are
correct.  The beverage however is very inefficient and very often requires
an outboard preamp to bring the signal level to the point where the Signal
to Noise Ratio is QRN limited. If you end up needing a preamp you can trade
matching complexity for preamp performance but otherwise you want to match
fairly well.

The terminated end of the beverage requires accurate matching to suppress the
antenna response in the backwards direction and is far more critical than
matching to the receiver.

bart   wb6hqk

>




From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:49 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!netnews.nwnet.net!news.microsoft.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Alan)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: CB antenna and other stuff for sale
Date: 18 Sep 1996 18:52:55 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <51pge7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 157.54.53.251
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.14


Subject:        While cleaning my garage, I found:

Courier 23 by ECI (base unit)
SEB Trinidad III 40 Channel Base Unit

Turner +2 base mic.
Turner +3 Base unit Mica.

Antenna Matcher
Ameco Low Pass Filter
Heathkit Relected Power and  SWR Bridge
2-Hustler Mobile Antennas
2-Quick Disconnects Mobile
2-Mura DX-116 Power Microphones
2-Antenna Switch boxes
Para Dynamics Corp. PDC 550 RF Power Scanner

Make offer cash or trade.

Thanks

[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:50 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.cdsnet.net!news.magicnet.net!nntp.newsfirst.com!nntp.crosslink.net!munnari.OZ.AU!news.mel.connect.com.au!melba.bby.com.au!usenet.dacom.co.kr!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!neptune.gan.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-12.sprintlink.net!ren.cei.net!cei.net!kistech
From: "James L Kistner" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: alt.agriculture.misc,alt.folklore.herbs,alt.org.food-not-bombs,alt.save.the.earth,alt.sustainable.agriculture,austin.gardening,bionet.plants,bionet.plants.education,misc.health.alternative,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,sci.agriculture,soc.culture.korean,triangle.gardens,uk.rec.gardening
Subject: Chitin Patented Product For Plants
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 12:24:53 -0500 (BST)
Organization: KISTNER NATURAL TECHNOLOGIES
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: max1-06.cei.net
X-Newsreader: NetcPlus NETcetera II - 2.51 (Registered) 12000067 (c)1994-1996
Xref: news2.epix.net alt.agriculture.misc:105 alt.folklore.herbs:31784 alt.org.food-not-bombs:2722 alt.save.the.earth:20908 alt.sustainable.agriculture:12276 austin.gardening:27 bionet.plants:11371 bionet.plants.education:709 misc.health.alternative:75733 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24254 sci.agriculture:11580 soc.culture.korean:91700 triangle.gardens:3106 uk.rec.gardening:4354

Please check out a non-toxic product for plant growth.
www.cei.net/~aware

Excuse any cross posting.

Jim

-----------------------------------------------------------------
James L. Kistner [e-mail]
670 Arrowhead Lane
Cave City, Ar. 72521
USA BBS 1-501-283-5378 2000-0800 CDT
using NETcetera II 2.51 (Registered)
for Internet News....
-----------------------------------------------------------------



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:51 1996
From: [e-mail] (JP)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Comet CX-702
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 20:50:35 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227
NNTP-Posting-Host: pin1asr-p01.imsweb.net
Lines: 4
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!rain.fr!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-9.sprintlink.net!colossus.tia.net!news.imsweb.net!

For Sale
Comet CX-702
Mobil TriBand Antenna
$50.00


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:52 1996
From: [e-mail] (JP)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Comet CX-702 Information
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 19:38:30 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227
NNTP-Posting-Host: pin1asr-p01.imsweb.net
Lines: 9
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde.nde.swri.edu!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!rain.fr!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-9.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-10.sprintlink.net!colossus.tia.net!news.imsweb.net!

I am looking for some info on a comet CX-702 mobil Tri band antena
Like the orgional cost
Power specifications and so on

Any help would be appreciated
I put one away in storage and it's time to get rid of this thing
I'd also like to know what one of these things are worth used.

Thanks
Jeff



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:53 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Current loop in open-circuit braid
Date: 18 Sep 1996 00:14:42 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 66
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <51nsvi$[e-mail]>
References: <51l82g$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Jack,

I followed you here.:-)

In article <51l82g$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>
>This is true and it serves to point out just one reason why
>voltage across the braid at the generator will almost never
>be zero when the far end of the braid is open.

The voltage across the braid at the end MUST be zero, because NOTHING
isolates the surfaces at the ends. Don't you agree? If it weren't zero,
the rat race theory woudn't work...so that statement conficts with your
own favorite view.

Then later....

>I respectfully suggest that your circuit analysis is incorrect.
>When the mutual coupling between two parallel conductors such
>as these is 100%, their respective currents will be equal and
>opposite.

Be careful here also. I think this is what confuses you in the balun Jack.
If I have two tightly coupled parallel conductors, mutual coupling
dictates the voltages at the same end is equal. Like this:

                  X
-  a o------[[[[[[[[[---------o b +
-  c o------[[[[[[[[[---------o d +
                 Y

If wire or winding X  has the polarity shown, wire or winding B will have
the polarity shown above. If a to b is 5 volts, c to d is also 5 volts.

This is all true if the wire is parallel wire, twisted pair, or coaxial
wire.

For example, coax:

- a   o-----((((((((((((((((((((---------o b+
- c     o---^                  ^------o   d+

If a to b is 5 volts, c to d is five volts. The polarity is exactly as
shown when the cable is excited as a transformer. Current is the same
also. If a voltage is placed across a to b, and c to d is loaded to draw
one ampere, the current in a to b will be one ampere and EXACTLY in the
same phase and direction.

I hope you agree with this. If not, you should do a few simple
experiments.

By the way Jack, this does not upset Roy's apple cart...or Bill's. What
each of them are saying works correctly in my example above, they simply
are disagreeing about the mechanics of the cable *inside the cable*.

This is also what I meant when I said there are two ways at looking at the
problem. One of circuit analysis, and the other more complicated way. I,
being the simple minded person I am, always look at any problem in the
simplest terms that work.

Withthat in mind, do you agree the above transformers will work exactly as
shown and described? Let's keep this simple for now.

73, Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:57 1996
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 01:00:58 +0100
From: Tim Rumph <[e-mail]>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Dual 2M Antenna Recommendation Needed
References: <513qa9$[e-mail]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: line51.nconline.com
Lines: 29
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!news.paonline.com!news3.paonline.com!line51.nconline.com

Dwight R. Hayes, Jr. wrote:
>
> I currently have two 2-Meter radios that I would like to put up antennas for
.
> I also have a scanner that I would like to put up a scanner antenna up as
> well.  All three of these are located on the same table so the coax needs ju
st
> to go from the antennas to a single area.
>
> I would like to place all of these antennas on a single mast, if possible bu
t
> would like recommendations from anyone who has done this before and learn fr
om
> their endevors.  I have seen multiple antennas on a single mast, but they ar
e
> usually the mix of HF and VHF/UHF, not three vertical orientation antennas.
>

I had two 2m antennas up until recently, one for packet (a colinear verticse)
and
one for voice (5 ele. yagi.)  (Actually three, the other a 12 ele. horizontial
ly
polarized yagi for 2m ssb.)

Having both antennas on the same mast is the best way to go, since there will
be less interference with that arrangement than if they are mounted on
seperate masts.  Keep them as far apart as the mast and coverage consideration
s
allow.  The only problem I've had with mine (about 5' apart) is some desencing
of the reciever when the other is transmitting on high power.  The scanner
antenna may be trickier, since the front end of the scanner is so broad.
--
73 de Tim
mailto://[e-mail]
KD4OWS@KC4WPG.#FAY.NC.USA.NOAM

Trains and radios.  Two great hobbies that go great together.


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:58 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!netcom.com!pineapp
From: [e-mail] (Daniel Curry)
Subject: E-Z WAY Tower address??
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Netcom-Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 16:00:39 GMT
Lines: 12
Sender: [e-mail]

 I have an E-Z TOWER crankup tower. I would like to find
out thier new address or who had purchased them? I have
an address in Tampa Florida, but I am unable to find
them using www.switcboard.com web site.

thank you,

--
.----------------------------------------------+--------------------------.
| INTERNET: [e-mail]     (DC436)     | Daniel Curry             |
| AMPRNET : [e-mail]  [44.4.20.144] | WB6STW                   |
| AX.25   : wb6stw@n0ary.#NOCAL.CA.USA.NOAM    | DoD # 1450   SOHC4 # 136 |
'----------------------------------------------+--------------------------'


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:05:59 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!hookup!news.nstn.ca!coranto.ucs.mun.ca!news.unb.ca!fan1.fan.nb.ca!aa370
From: "Bruce W.L. Jack" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: External TV question (antenna)
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 20:18:49 -0300
Organization: University of New Brunswick
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: fan1.fan.nb.ca
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

 I seen a recent ad in a local Radio Shack flyer and thought I'd ask your
opinions on it.
  The ad showed a picture of an outdoor TV antenna but it was only a
round, flat solid disk. Are these any good? How to you tune them in (if
needed)? It boasted an gain of 20db VHF and 25db UHF, is this good?
  Thanx
--
Bruce W.L. Jack  --  Fredericton Area Network



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:03 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsfeeder.servtech.com!news1.io.org!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS
Date: 15 Sep 1996 18:01:42 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 69
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <51huc6$[e-mail]>
References: <51g15j$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <51g15j$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Fractenna) writes:

>
>RE: Toms' 'supposed e-mail.'

Sorry Chip, not "supposed" , I really got those! I'm sure they were tounge
in cheek, because one was signed "da mad mispeler". In hindsight, the
humor was misplaced. I'm sorry to make fun of something you take so
seriously, I shouldn't have done that.

I'm a little frustrated because you make some pretty wild claims and fail
to support them with theory. The topper is you fall back on name calling,
implying anyone that disagrees with you is a "liar" ior "stands in the way
of progress".

At the same time you do this, you mis-use terms like radiation resistance
and confuse an S unit with six dB. You publish tests but fail to describe
them in detail, while needless room is taken up with witty personal
comments and needless jargon and catch-phrases.

For example, the 73 article highlighted "The radiation resistance of this
vertical is higher than a conventional system, hence the better VSWR  and
bandwidth."

That all sounds good, but a close look reveals the following:

1.) You had no idea what the radiation resistance was, you only used
feedpoint resistance...which includes loss and radiation resistance and
the transformation of impedance caused by the transmission line effect of
the radiator.

2.) Radiation resistance has no direct bearing on antenna system Q. A very
thick dipole has nearly the same radiation resistance as a very thin
dipole, yet has much greater bandwidth. Feedpoint resistance, the
parameter you keep mistaking for radiation resistance, has even LESS of a
bearing on bandwidth.

3.) VSWR can be increased as well as decreased by increased radiation
resistance, or feedpoint resistance as you mis-use the term.

another highlighted statement was "Now you can put on radials for a n40m
or 80m vertical in a small lot."

Standing alone that statement was ALWAYS true. If, in the context of the
article, you meant to imply the system would suddenly become efficient via
use of fractals, there was nothing other than pure conjecture to support
that view.

It bad enough when an article's supporting references only include friends
and associates. When an author can only reference himself as a supporting
reference, it's a sign the theory may be getting out on a limb.

Attempts to turn this into a technical discussion of why the things you
claim to happen "will happen" get rebuffed by name calling or "it's the
way it is because I said so". That's another clear sign this is not
science, but rather a personal opinion.

>THANKS!
>
>You just proved my point.

Which was what? That's what I am missing, what is your technical point?

You've made no scientific measurements and offer no technical
explainations, yet claim to hold the key to revolutionizing antenna
theory.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:04 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!cmcl2!panix!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!eru.mt.luth.se!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx24-23
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FRACTAL ANTENNAS
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 96 05:38:10 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <51ip1l$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <51f6ov$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx24-23.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <51f6ov$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (K1BQT) wrote:

>. . .

>3.  A Comm Quart article is referenced as a fractal ground resource
>(Summer 96, p 61).  Here, it is claimed EZNEC predicts the commplex M12
>shape will yield a 1.3 dB advantage over a disc.  However (correct me if
>I'm wrong, Roy), I believe EZNEC (or any NEC-based program)'s ability to
>predict accurately the performance of extremely-short folded wires is yet
>unverified.  Also,(correct me if I'm wrong, Chip) the actual performance
>of a disc vs. a fractal structure has never been tested on a range.  Thus
>any claim of fractal superiority over a disc is presently a hypothesis
>only...and not a proven in fact.

NEC-2 has a known problem with very small closed loops (on the order of 0.01
wavelength circumference or smaller). Whether or not it does with open-sided
structures of this size, I don't know. NEC-4 is much more tolerant of very sma
ll
loops, though, so a comparison between NEC-2 and NEC-4 results would show if
NEC-2 is encountering this problem with a given model.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:05 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!news.inc.net!uwm.edu!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ptd.net!ns1.ptd.net!n3tvv
From: n3tvv <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: H.F. radio setup
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 00:20:41 -0400
Organization: ProLog - PenTeleData, Inc.
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ns1.ptd.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Sender: [e-mail]

I`M A NO CODE TECH THAT WILL BE STEPPING UP TO A GENERAL AND
EVENTUALLY  HIGHER, I HAVE A BUTTERNUT BUTTERFLY FOR 10-20 METERS AND
NEED 100 FEET OF FEEDLINE TO REACH FROM MY RADIO ROOM TO MY ANTENNA.WHAT
WOULD SUPPOSE THE BEST TYPE OF FEEDLINE,EFFICENCY WISE,ASIN COST AND LOSS?

                              JUST CURIOUS
                                 ERIC
                                    (N3TVV)


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:06 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!tezcat!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde.nde.swri.edu!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!dimensional.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Richard MacDonald)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Help - Fixing HiFi interference
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 10:02:29 -0600
Organization: Dimensional Communications
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4vpo1q$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <01bba386$6f7b0920$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: p01.pm-4.pm.dimensional.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227

On 16 Sep 1996 04:17:46 GMT, "Harv Shore" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Can u recommend chokes to be used?
>>
>> My guess is that it is coming in via the AC. To do as much as you can in
>> one operation, why dont you add multiple snap-one chokes to the end of
>> the speaker cable just before it enters the hifi. Also add multiple
>> chokes to the AC cable and maybe to the AC leads of compact disk
>> players, tape players, etc. that may be attached to the hifi.
>>
>> Good luck. 73 de Dave, N0IT
>>
>>
At one time, merely putting a .001 capacitor (value not critical) across the
speaker terminals on the speaker itself cured the problem for me. At least it'
s
a cheap fix if it works. If you use chokes, be sure they are heavy enough wire
to handle the current, at least if you listen to things loud.

See my page at:
http://www.dimensional.com/~richmacd/bcbest.html for "Boulder County's Best"
(not to be confused with "The Best of Boulder")


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:07 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.genuity.net!news.lafn.org!usenet
From: "Harv Shore" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Help - Fixing HiFi interference
Date: 16 Sep 1996 04:17:46 GMT
Organization: Unknown Organization
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <01bba386$6f7b0920$[e-mail]>
References: <4vpo1q$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.168.13.7
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

Can u recommend chokes to be used?
>
> My guess is that it is coming in via the AC. To do as much as you can in
> one operation, why dont you add multiple snap-one chokes to the end of
> the speaker cable just before it enters the hifi. Also add multiple
> chokes to the AC cable and maybe to the AC leads of compact disk
> players, tape players, etc. that may be attached to the hifi.
>
> Good luck. 73 de Dave, N0IT
>
>


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:08 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!tezcat!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-feed2.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!news
From: [e-mail] (W6KKT Jesse)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Help? Dimensions and phasing /DJ2UT "Sommers" Beam
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 16:10:41 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 3
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dyn10.frazmtn.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/16.227

Help: I would like to model with EZNEC the DJ2UT "Sommers" beam (The
one with a 20' boom).  Anyone out there have a model or information?
73, Jesse, W6KKT


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:09 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!gatech!arclight.uoregon.edu!chi-news.cic.net!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.enteract.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [e-mail](?????)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: HELP???
Date: 18 Sep 1996 02:29:58 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <51nmr6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lvx-nv6-01.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Tue Sep 17  9:29:58 PM CDT 1996



>SORRY TO BOTHER ANYONE, BUT CAN SOMEONE PLEASE TELL ME THE CORRECT
>NEWS GROUP FOR QUESTIONS/ADVISE ON HAM RADIOS.THANK YOU.


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:10 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.mindspring.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!hookup!news.nstn.ca!coranto.ucs.mun.ca!news.unb.ca!fan1.fan.nb.ca!aa370
From: "Bruce W.L. Jack" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Home TV antenna
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 08:53:37 -0300
Organization: University of New Brunswick
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: fan1.fan.nb.ca
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>

> As a general rule it is best to use the largest, highest gain antenna you
> can install to capture the most signal. This is generally true for all
> antennas. If the received signal is still marginal, there are ampilifiers
> available that can be mounted at the antenna terminals. That is the most
> efficient place to install it. The large antenna is the first step and
> the amplifier should be the second. If that combination doesn't perform
> well, you are in a very weak signal area. Before you go to a lot of
> expense, check with a few TV shops in the area to see what they know
> about reception conditions in your location.
>
 Ok. Thanx for the info. I will try a larger antenna first. I've seen a
couple around here using larger antenna's so perhaps that is what I need.

  TTYL


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:11 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!gatech!arclight.uoregon.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [e-mail](Ron Klein )
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How do i build a good dx antenna for 80M?
Date: 15 Sep 1996 15:37:31 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <51h7rr$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftc-co1-15.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun Sep 15 10:37:31 AM CDT 1996

In <[e-mail]> "Vernon J. Kunes, Jr."
<[e-mail]> writes:
>
>If you can get an 80Peter Sundstr÷m wrote:
>>
>> Hello ! I would like to build a good dx antenna for 80M.
>> What should i try ?
>> // PeterIf you can get an 80 mtr horizontal skyloop up 1/4
wavelength above the
>ground, I tyhink that it would work just fine.
>73 de N2YZS

I use a pair of Hygain Hytower verticals spaced for 1/4 wave apart at
3800 with 1/4 wave phasing lines. It does well.

You do need some room to put all this up. I also have a half mile of
radials under the two antennas.

73,

Ron - W0OSK
--
Ron Klein
---------
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:12 1996
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 19:29:36 -0400
From: "Vernon J. Kunes, Jr." <[e-mail]>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How do i build a good dx antenna for 80M?
References: <[e-mail]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: vjkunesjr
Lines: 7
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.sgi.com!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!news.paonline.com!news3.paonline.com!vjkunesjr

If you can get an 80Peter Sundstr÷m wrote:
>
> Hello ! I would like to build a good dx antenna for 80M.
> What should i try ?
> // PeterIf you can get an 80 mtr horizontal skyloop up 1/4 wavelength above
the
ground, I tyhink that it would work just fine.
73 de N2YZS


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:12 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!utcsri!utnut!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!dg198
From: [e-mail] (Frank Sved)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How do i build a good dx antenna for 80M?
Date: 16 Sep 1996 13:53:11 -0400
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 19
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <51k467$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Frank Sved)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet-news.carleton.ca

Peter Sundstr÷m ([e-mail]) writes:
> Hello ! I would like to build a good dx antenna for 80M.
> What should i try ?
> // Peter


A small vertical on a 200' tower works well.

No tower?  Well try what I did, a G5RV.  If you have a little space it is
excellent.  Just want 80m?  Buy two rolls of 21.3m copper antenna wire
from Radio Shack, centre feed it with coax (no balun).  Works good, need a
tuner.

Good luck.

--


  Bye for now, Frank Sved (VE3GID) at [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:14 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!venus.sun.com!news2me.EBay.Sun.COM!newsworthy.West.Sun.COM!news70.West.Sun.COM!myers
From: [e-mail] (Dana Myers)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: how to determine TX output Z?
Date: 13 Sep 1996 05:07:56 GMT
Organization: SunSoft South, Los Angeles, CA
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <51aq7c$[e-mail]>
References: <519k68$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sunspot.west.sun.com
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24170 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:32316

In article <[e-mail]>,
Cecil Moore  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Jay Kolin wrote:
>> Transmit thru a Bird into a 50ohm dummy load. See what your ref power is.
>> If nil, then you've got a 50ohm system. If Hi REF, you can calculate what
>> the output impedence is!
>
>But Jay, you won't ever get any reflections from that 50ohm dummy load
>through a 50ohm Bird wattmeter no matter what the source impedance is.
>
>73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)


Oh, no!!  They've woken Cecil!! Run for th hills!!

Of course, Cecil is correct.  Also, measuring S22 (as someone else
suggested) tells you very little for the same reason - many amplifiers
designed to drive 50 ohm loads do not present a 50 ohm load at the
output.

Given that the manufacturer of the 900MHz module is known, the
easiest way to find out what the intended load is would be to call
the manufacturer.
--
 * Dana H. Myers KK6JQ, DoD#: j | Views expressed here are mine and should *
 * [phone]               | not be interpreted or represented as     *
 * [e-mail]      | those of Sun Microsystems, Inc.          *



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:15 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!venus.sun.com!news2me.EBay.Sun.COM!newsworthy.West.Sun.COM!news70.West.Sun.COM!myers
From: [e-mail] (Dana Myers)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: how to determine TX output Z?
Date: 13 Sep 1996 05:11:19 GMT
Organization: SunSoft South, Los Angeles, CA
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <51aqdn$[e-mail]>
References: <519k68$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sunspot.west.sun.com
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24171 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:32317

In article <[e-mail]>, Richard Helzer  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>David Black wrote:
>>
>> Does anyone know good ways to determine the output impedance
>> of a transmitter? I'd like to match a 50 ohm antenna to a
>> transmitter of unknown output impedance. The transmitter is
>> of fairly low power (1mW or thereabouts).
>>
>> FWIW, the radio is a National Semiconductor "AirShare" NBFM data
>> module on 902-928 MHz, that I'd like to convert to ham use. I'd like
>> to attach an external antenna, to replace the internal microstrip
>> antenna. If anyone has info on these boxes (HSC sold them a while
>> back, and they also appeared at a flea markets), please drop me a
>> line.
>>
>> My best idea so far is to experiment with an LC matching network
>> and listen to the TX output on a remote receiver for best signal.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Dave WB9TMF
>
>I would use a return loss bridge, such as the one made and sold by Eagle
>in Wichita, KS (also sold by IFR with their name on it) or something
>similar. Used in conjuction with a service monitor with spectrum
>analyzer/tracking generator, you can sweep the output of the unknown tx.
>At 1 mw it would be no problem to do and you can see *exactly* what you
>have. The return loss bridge that I refer to can handle about 1 watt. I
>recently did this on some brand new and EXPENSIVE test gear and found
>that the output that was supposed to be 50 ohms and "calibrated" was
>nowhere near 50 ohms (in fact, 6:1 SWR), and couldn't be calibrated!
>They are now re-designing.

The return loss of a transmitter intended to drive a 50 ohm load
is often very low - a transmitter can be designed to drive a 50 ohm
load and not present a 50 ohm load.  A signal generator that
is intended for testing in a 50 ohm should present a 50 ohm
load, but a transmitter is a different story.

I can turn most any source into a 50 ohm source with a resistive
pad, by the way...

--
 * Dana H. Myers KK6JQ, DoD#: j | Views expressed here are mine and should *
 * [phone]               | not be interpreted or represented as     *
 * [e-mail]      | those of Sun Microsystems, Inc.          *



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:16 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!EU.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!psgrain!rainrgnews0!hevanet.com!usenet
From: "miker in Tigard, OR." <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment
Subject: Re: how to determine TX output Z?
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 00:42:16 -0700
Organization: Hevanet Communications
Lines: 62
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <519k68$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <51aqdn$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: st-ppp14.hevanet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win95; I)
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24172 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:32320

You probably don't care what the output impedance is.  What you want
to
know is the impedance into which the output stage delivers maximum
output consistent with low spurious output.  Then you build a
network
to convert your 50 ohm load to this impedance.  Classical theory
would lead you to the assumption of a conjugate match, but these things
ain't at all linear.  And your 50 ohm coax likely doesn't present
anywhere
near a 50 ohm load anyway.

Suggest you hang a coax on the output.  If it does what you want, ship
it.  Try moving the tap point along the stripline for maximum smoke.

Dana Myers wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, Richard Helzer  <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >David Black wrote:
> >>
> >> Does anyone know good ways to determine the output impedance
> >> of a transmitter? I'd like to match a 50 ohm antenna to a
> >> transmitter of unknown output impedance. The transmitter is
> >> of fairly low power (1mW or thereabouts).
> >>
> >> FWIW, the radio is a National Semiconductor "AirShare" NBFM data
> >> module on 902-928 MHz, that I'd like to convert to ham use. I'd like
> >> to attach an external antenna, to replace the internal microstrip
> >> antenna. If anyone has info on these boxes (HSC sold them a while
> >> back, and they also appeared at a flea markets), please drop me a
> >> line.
> >>
> >> My best idea so far is to experiment with an LC matching network
> >> and listen to the TX output on a remote receiver for best signal.
> >>
> >> 73,
> >>
> >> Dave WB9TMF
> >
> >I would use a return loss bridge, such as the one made and sold by Eagle
> >in Wichita, KS (also sold by IFR with their name on it) or something
> >similar. Used in conjuction with a service monitor with spectrum
> >analyzer/tracking generator, you can sweep the output of the unknown tx.
> >At 1 mw it would be no problem to do and you can see *exactly* what you
> >have. The return loss bridge that I refer to can handle about 1 watt. I
> >recently did this on some brand new and EXPENSIVE test gear and found
> >that the output that was supposed to be 50 ohms and "calibrated" was
> >nowhere near 50 ohms (in fact, 6:1 SWR), and couldn't be calibrated!
> >They are now re-designing.
>
> The return loss of a transmitter intended to drive a 50 ohm load
> is often very low - a transmitter can be designed to drive a 50 ohm
> load and not present a 50 ohm load.  A signal generator that
> is intended for testing in a 50 ohm should present a 50 ohm
> load, but a transmitter is a different story.
>
> I can turn most any source into a 50 ohm source with a resistive
> pad, by the way...
>
> --
>  * Dana H. Myers KK6JQ, DoD#: j | Views expressed here are mine and should *
>  * [phone]               | not be interpreted or represented as     *
>  * [e-mail]      | those of Sun Microsystems, Inc.          *


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:17 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.cdsnet.net!news.magicnet.net!news.supernet.net!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!news.sgi.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!cpk-news-feed2.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: how to determine TX output Z?
Date: 13 Sep 1996 14:47:53 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 31
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <51b2jr$[e-mail]>
References: <519k68$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <519k68$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (David
Black) writes:

>
>Does anyone know good ways to determine the output impedance
>of a transmitter? I'd like to match a 50 ohm antenna to a
>transmitter of unknown output impedance. The transmitter is
>of fairly low power (1mW or thereabouts).

The output impedance of any transmitter that is not class A varies with
the amount of excitation. If you sweep the transmitters output with any RF
that even remotely approaches the transmitters power it will totally upset
any measurement. An external meter measuring SWR will only indicate the
load SWR, it won't tell you anything about the transmitter impedance
(unless you change the load until the meter measures maximum forward
power, then it tells you something about the transmitter).

Since all you want to do is transfer maximum power (so you use all of the
roaring loud 1 mW) I think the FS meter is a good idea. The problem is
with the high frequency components have parasitic impedances, a coil has
some stay capacitance and a capacitor has stray inductive reactance, so
building a matching circuit is real tricky.

You'll need to use physically small components and keep the leads very
short. Fractions of an inch make a large difference at these frequencies.

You asked a question that has engineers that spend their lives working
with transmitters "fighting", so you'll get so many answers you'll be
totally confused, hi.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:18 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-5.sprintlink.net!voskovec.radio.cz!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.myriad.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Hygain Hytower Vertical - MK-160 Inverted L Kit for 160
Date: 16 Sep 1996 08:01:16 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 73
Message-ID: <51j1gc$[e-mail]>
References: <51h8i3$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup570.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <51h8i3$[e-mail]>, [e-mail](Ron Klein )
writes:
>I'd like to hear what experience people have had with this 160 meter
>add-on kit for the Hygain 18-HT hytower vertical.
>
>In my case, I have two of these verticals spaced 1/4 wave at 3800 and
>phased with 1/4 wave phasing lines. I have the switching configured to
>allow isolation of one vertical for use as a standalone. I am
>considering adding the Inverted L to this one, but am curious what
>experience others have had re. performance effects on other bands. I'm
>also a little uneasy about the potential impact on the 2 element phased
>array configuration on 75.
>
>I'd like to benefit from the experience of others.
>
>e-mail is preferable to this newsgroup as I don't check it regularly.
>I'll post a summary after I get enough feedback.
>
>Thanks.
>
>73,
>
>Ron - W0OSK
>--
>Ron Klein
>---------
>[e-mail]

Posting here so others might read.  I've played with 4 element 4 square
arrays for both 40 and 80 for a long time now.

I've disovered you have to be VERY careful about what you put up anywhere
within shootin' distance of them.  As soon as vertical metal starts going up
anywhere close to these arrays, your pattern goes to heck in a hand basket
if you are not careful.

If you have a modeling program, I suggest that you simply experiment with
putting up a metal pole higher than the array anywhere within a few wave
lengths of it.  Push the button and watch the mess that becomes of your
nice pattern.  I was dumbfounded.  To do any real good job of clearing the
pattern for the 80 meter array, I had to get the nearest 150 foot tower at
least 600, yes SIX hundred feet from it...

    :(

Now that's not nice.

What happens is that to have any clean plant in any reasonable plot of land
with these phased arrays, you have to really go about tuning out the offending

towers to keep the pattern clean.

I had no real idea how sensitive they are until I started really plotting the
stuff out.  Now I know why there is a whole consulting business springing
up in the AM Broadcast field tracking and correcting what all these cellular
phone antenna towers are doing to foul up the pattern calculations of the
directioanl array AM stations!   It seems that if the conditions are anywhere
near right, you punch up one of these cellular phone towers within a mile or
so of the BC station and the pattern is gone!

Nobody bothers to check the effect of the new cell sites, apparently, and they

are royally chewing up the AM patterns....

I wanted a 160 meter 4 square..   however....   I'm having LOTS of fun trying
to just fit a single 180 foot rotating tower plan into the 80 meter 4 square
made of 4 sticks of Rohn 25G that I already have up....

Please get a plotting program and play before you make up your mind..  You
may save yourself a LOT of heartache if you have a nice 2 element array
now as you seem to have...

Mike @ W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:19 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!metro.atlanta.com!cpk-news-feed3.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Demccurdy)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: INVERTED L
Date: 14 Sep 1996 06:55:05 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 1
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <51e2u9$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Demccurdy)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

HAS ANYONE ANSWERED YOUR INQUIRY?


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:20 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.cais.net!news2.cais.com!lemas
From: [e-mail] (Alec Lemas)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.shortwave,vol.it.hobby.radiantismo,rec.radio.amateur.dx
Subject: Re: JPS ANC-4... Will it work?
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 96 16:10:21 GMT
Organization: The Cold
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <51c13p$[e-mail]>
References: <513stp$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fabrizio Micale)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.252.35.151
X-Newsreader: News Xpress 2.0 Beta #2
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24174 rec.radio.shortwave:78497 rec.radio.amateur.dx:294

In article <513stp$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Fabrizio Micale) w
rote:
>Hello,
>
>maybe some of you remembers one of my messages regarding interferences
>received by my Icom R-71 receiver from my DX2/66 PC.
>To make it brief, I tried anything I could try, with very poor results,
>so that I still can't decode RTTY and FAX transmission on most cases.
>Then somebody suggested me to try (which means to buy) the ANC-4 noise
>reduction unit from JPS, that seems to be a good device.
>Now I need to hear from somebody using this unit, to know a bit more of
>results obtained, and/or any detail which could be useful for me. I
>already read the article about it somewhere.
>An e-mail reply to this article would be much better !
>Thanks a lot!!
>
>Fabrizio Micale - Italy
>[e-mail]

  I bought one around a month ago to help with interference problems from my
 p/c,amoung others.
 The ANC-4 is one of the few devices I've come across that truly does what
it's purported to do.It does take alot of fine tuning to get it's full
potential,but once you get the hang of it,you'll love it.


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:21 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!castle.nando.net!news
From: Dave Hockaday <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.shortwave,vol.it.hobby.radiantismo,rec.radio.amateur.dx
Subject: Re: JPS ANC-4... Will it work?
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 10:42:31 -0700
Organization: Nando.net Public Access
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <513stp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: grail1014.nando.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; I)
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24238 rec.radio.shortwave:78585 rec.radio.amateur.dx:300

> maybe some of you remembers one of my messages regarding interferences
> received by my Icom R-71 receiver from my DX2/66 PC.<snip>
> Now I need to hear from somebody using this unit, to know a bit more of
> results obtained, and/or any detail which could be useful for me. I
> Fabrizio Micale - Italy
> [e-mail]

My wife bought an ANC-4 for me as a Christmas gift last year. I love it! It's
one
accessory that really does what it should in my shack. I have a lot of powerli
ne noise
on 160 meters, and computer noise on 10 and 6 meters. The ANC-4 will completel
y
eliminate the interference and I can hear signals that I didn't know were ther
e. When
my 160 meter powerline noise disappears (which does happen, though rarely!), I
 can
null weak interfering signals from my television set, too.

I've found, by connecting another of my dipoles to it's noise antenna input, I
 can use
it as a null steering unit as well. The ANC-4 gets my vote as a useful accesso
ry.

73
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:22 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsreader.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!nntp.primenet.com!news.mindspring.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (david l. thompson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Kurt's rectangle
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 14:13:10 GMT
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises, Inc.
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <51m053$[e-mail]>
References: <515hhp$[e-mail]> <519omu$[e-mail]> <51djmi$[e-mail]> <51c57b$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: user-168-121-41-202.dialup.mindspring.com
X-Server-Date: 17 Sep 1996 10:56:35 GMT
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Cecil Moore <[e-mail]> wrote:

>david l. thompson wrote:
>> 2. I  ran the antenna fed at the bottom (on 160 as an L) and then fed
>>    at the top(with ladder line) thru W0MHS's older NEC program.  at 20
>>    degrees the gain was 1.96DBI at the bottom and 4.92DBi fed at the top.

>Hi Dave, for the closed rectangle, moving the feed from the center of a
>side to the top of a side raises the TOA considerably. For a 40m
>rectangle, it raised the TOA from 18deg to 41deg, not good for someone
>interested in DX.

>73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)

Probably right,  I used it mainly as a 160L.  Did not run it thru the
program.  Got EZNEC coming so will do so.   Feeding it in the center
is good for 80 as a loop...don't know what that would do as an L for
160.   See what EZNEC tells you.

In any case this antenna is superior to the G5RV on 80!

Dave K4JRB



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:23 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.myriad.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Lightning Damage
Date: 16 Sep 1996 08:04:05 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <51j1ll$[e-mail]>
References: <51cipi$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup570.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <51cipi$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
>Has anybody out there had problems with Lightning Damage to their radio
>or antennas?  I have some lightning suppression experience to share with
>folks, but am wondering how big a problem it really is.
>
>John

>Post away!  Those of us that have been visited LOTS, like I have are
sitting here like the cat that ate the chees and waited in front of the mouse
hole with baited breath!!!

Anyone with fresh meat for this grinder is darned sure welcome.

Anyone in thunderstorm alley with big antennaes gits clobbered rite reglar..

:)

Mike @ W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:24 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!ix.netcom.com!news
From: Don Labriola <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Lightning Damage
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 18:39:40 -0700
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <51cipi$[e-mail]> <51j1ll$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ont-ca3-06.ix.netcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-NETCOM-Date: Mon Sep 16  9:16:22 PM CDT 1996
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win16; I)

[e-mail] wrote:
>
> In <51cipi$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
> >Has anybody out there had problems with Lightning Damage to their radio
> >or antennas?  I have some lightning suppression experience to share with
> >folks, but am wondering how big a problem it really is.
> >
> >John
>
> >Post away!  Those of us that have been visited LOTS, like I have are
> sitting here like the cat that ate the chees and waited in front of the mous
e
> hole with baited breath!!!
>
> Anyone with fresh meat for this grinder is darned sure welcome.
>
> Anyone in thunderstorm alley with big antennaes gits clobbered rite reglar..
>
> :)
.....
Not even in thunder alley -- one of the large area repeaters in Los
Angeles - the Baldy machine - had the antenna shredded, the hardline
melted, the lightning arrestor vaporized, and the cavities taken out
(i'm running out of cooked descriptive words) by a large bolt. It was
the top antenna on a commerical tower. Its been almost 6 months to get
everything back to par and it is not quite there yet!

Don - N6CNB


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:25 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.net66.com!jolt.pagesat.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.myriad.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Log-periodic Question
Date: 15 Sep 1996 16:42:04 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 64
Message-ID: <51hbks$[e-mail]>
References: <51h22n$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup574.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <51h22n$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dan Richardson) writes:
>Does anyone know the normal efficiency that can be expected by your
>basic "ham type" commercially made  log-periodic for 10 - 20 meter
>bands?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Danny -  K6MHE
>
>

It varies substantially according to the number of elements that are "in" the
operating frequency range.  Typical designs that place roughly three "in" the
target band, can't offer much better than a three element comparision, as
I feebly understand the deal.

If five elements were "in" the target band, gain would go up somewhat,
compared to what three "in" the target band would do.

The worst part of them, as I understand it from plotting them, is that the
F/B ration isn't very good, compared to what one can get from well designed
other antenna types.  I was getting 8-12 DB F/B for most of them I could
dream up that I might be able to contemplate for 40/20 meters.

After plotting them, I decided that the best use for the technique might be
for broadbanding the driven cell of a good yagi, similar to what I think KLM
does.

The best antenna I have EVER heard on 40 meters for F/B is the wonderful
signal of K3TUP up in Erie.  John uses the log periodic driven cell in a two
element configuration with one reflector and one director up at about 120 feet
.
When that array is turned toward Europe, I've noticed REAL F/B results that
seem to me to be WAY beyond 40DB down, maybe even better than 60DB down
in practice, in place on the low end of 40 meter CW.

My father is from Erie, buried in a cemetary close to K3TUP's home.

I visited his estate and got a look at it.  Was shown the place by a very
small slight soft spoken gentleman, John wasn't there.  As we walked the
antenna farm, I commented on the F/B ratio of the 40 meter array and asked
this fellow, "Why does it have such a good F/B?"

He told me, "ME!"

Puzzled, I again asked and he again replied, "ME!"

Still not understanding, I said, "I don't understand!"

He told me and I quote him, "He pays me to go out there and adjust it."

I'm six four and weigh in at about 250 pounds.  I looked way down at his
very small slight frame, perhaps 90 pounds or so.

I said nothing, simply shook my head.  There are some things just beyond
words in this hobby, folks.

You can't get that kind of F/B with a plain Log Periodic, I think.

Efficiency is more than just gain....

Mike W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:26 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!southwind.net!symbios.com!csn!nntp-xfer-2.csn.net!csn!nntp-xfer-1.csn.net!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!newspump.sol.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!miwok!news.mcn.org!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Dan Richardson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Log-periodic Question
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 13:02:28 GMT
Organization: LPS Systems
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <51h22n$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: an1-men-a21.mcn.org
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Does anyone know the normal efficiency that can be expected by your
basic "ham type" commercially made  log-periodic for 10 - 20 meter
bands?

Thanks,

Danny -  K6MHE




From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:27 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!ifwtech.demon.co.uk!G3SEK
From: "Ian White, G3SEK" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Log-periodic Question
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 13:30:56 +0100
Organization: IFW Technical Services
Lines: 30
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <51h22n$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
 <51o3s6$[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 1.12 <9qI82xurdT5+z2vSgnCPFcKgQL>

Roy Lewallen wrote:
>In article <[e-mail]>, Avatar <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>Dan Richardson wrote:
>>>
>>> Does anyone know the normal efficiency that can be expected by your
>>
>>I'm puzzled. How do you define efficiency?
>
>When used in the context of antennas, "efficiency" has a well-defined
>and generally universally agreed-upon meaning. It's the fraction of the power

>applied to the antenna or antenna system which is radiated. (The remainder of

>the applied power is turned into heat.) If you do use the word to mean someth
ing
>else, it's very likely to be misunderstood unless you make a point of stating

>your meaning.

I'd go even farther than Roy, and say that it isn't yours to redefine -
or misuse.

>
>Log periodics, along with most "full-size" ground-independent antennas (ones
>with near half-wave elements and not depending on low-elevated or buried grou
nd
>systems) are usually very efficient -- close enough to 100% that they can be
>considered 100% for most practical purposes.
>
>Roy Lewallen, W7EL

73 from Ian G3SEK          Editor, 'The VHF/UHF DX Book'
                          'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
Professionally:
IFW Technical Services     Clear technical English - world-wide.


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:28 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!spool.mu.edu!newspump.sol.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.zeitgeist.net!news.greatbasin.net!usenet
From: Dick Flanagan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Looking for HF Mobile Antenna
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 12:26:23 -0700
Organization: Libelle Productions, Inc., Minden, Nevada USA
Lines: 14
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: merlin.libelle.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
To: Seth Thomas Schneider <[e-mail]>

Seth Thomas Schneider wrote:
>
> I'm evaluating HF 10-80 mobile antennas to find one that will work well
> for me. So far I've heard of TJ Antenna, Carolina Bug Catcher,
> Bandhopper, Don Johnsons antenna.

I've tried the BBB family, Bug Catchers, Outbackers and Hustlers, but
the Bandhopper wins my personal recommendation for combining reasonable
efficiency with solid mechanical construction.  It costs twice as much
as the rest of the pack, but I have found it worth it.

My 2 cents.
--
Dick Flanagan, W6OLD, CFII-G  ([e-mail])  Minden, Nevada


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:29 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.netone.com!imci3!pull-feed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.infi.net!usenet
From: Scott Ryan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: Low cost balun for random wire
Date: 12 Sep 1996 22:43:05 GMT
Organization: InfiNet
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <51a3lp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pa1dsp21.cid.infi.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; U; 16bit)
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24169 rec.radio.shortwave:78488

Is there a low cost balun for a random longwire.  I the $60.00+ "MLB"
type seems excessive (cost wise) for my needs.



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:30 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!news.inc.net!newspump.sol.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!ennfs.eas.asu.edu!noao!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Michael Keane x204)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: Re: Low cost balun for random wire
Date: 13 Sep 1996 16:01:40 -0400
Organization: Cerro Tololo Interamerican Observatory
Lines: 61
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <51a3lp$[e-mail]> <51a8ld$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ctiowd.ctio.noao.edu
In-reply-to: [e-mail]'s message of 13 Sep 1996 00:08:13 GMT
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.1
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24176 rec.radio.shortwave:78502

In article <51a8ld$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns) writes
:

|>
|> Scott Ryan ([e-mail]) wrote:
|> : Is there a low cost balun for a random longwire.  I the $60.00+ "MLB"
|> : type seems excessive (cost wise) for my needs.
|>
|> Hmm.  Maybe I'm missing something here, but I'm failing to see the need.
|> Certainly you need a (hopefully good) ground or counterpoise to feed the
|> random longwire against, but what exactly is the balun for?

You're right, there's no need to use a balun for such an antenna. And
in actuality the "MLB" is not even a balun: it's really a broadband RF
transformer.

The nominal impedance of a random, end-fed wire is typically 400-800
ohms except at frequencies in the immediate vicinity of resonances at
which the wire is an odd-multiple of a quarter wavelength. Using a
transformer with an impedance ratio in the range of 8:1 to 12:1 will
reduce the magnitude of the mismatch when feeding such an antenna with
50/75 ohm coaxial cable.

Both Palomar and ICE make equivalent products that are somewhat less
expensive than RF Systems' version.  Of course, you can always wind
your own transformer for under $10 worth of parts, less if you're even
slightly resourceful at scrounging.

A little impedance matching won't hurt, but it's not going to help
very much either. For receiving systems, the figure of merit is the
delivered signal-to-noise ratio. With modern, low-noise receivers,
which includes most every receiver built in the past 50 years, the
signal-to-noise ratio is almost always set externally by the ambient
noise level, even when using a moderately inefficient antenna.

High efficiency antennas are wonderful things, no transmitter should
ever be without one. However, for a receiving antenna at HF, high
antenna efficiency simply delivers high signal and high external noise
levels simultaneously. As long as an antenna picks up more noise from
the environment than the receiver generates internally, there is no
net increase in the signal-to-noise ratio to be gotten from improving
antenna efficiency via impedance matching or any other means.

If one can hear a noticeable drop in the background noise level (with
AGC turned off) when disconnecting the antenna, then no significant
increase in the detectability of faint signals or the listenability of
strong signals will result from using a more efficient antenna for
receiving.

For a typical random length, end-fed receiving antenna, the
improvements that would actually be realized by using an RF
transformer are quite modest.  With the transformer, the signal and
noise levels could increase by +7 dB at frequencies where the antenna
length is a multiple of a half wave.  This might yield a 3 dB
improvement in the net signal-to-noise ratio at these same frequencies
if the external noise level was extremely low. For a typical urban or
suburban ambient noise levels however, the signal-to-noise improvement
would be expected to be smaller, typically less than 1 dB.
--
Michael Keane           CE2/K1MK        Cerro Tololo Interamerican Observatory
                                        Casilla 603
[e-mail]                         La Serena, CHILE


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:32 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!EU.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!senator-bedfellow.mit.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (John Doty)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: Re: Low cost balun for random wire
Date: 13 Sep 1996 19:10:37 GMT
Organization: Massachvsetts Institvte of Technology
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <51cbjd$[e-mail]>
References: <51a8ld$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: isoroku.mit.edu
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24178 rec.radio.shortwave:78503

In article <51a8ld$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns)
writes:
> Scott Ryan ([e-mail]) wrote:
> : Is there a low cost balun for a random longwire.  I the $60.00+ "MLB"
> : type seems excessive (cost wise) for my needs.
>
> Hmm.  Maybe I'm missing something here, but I'm failing to see the need.
> Certainly you need a (hopefully good) ground or counterpoise to feed the
> random longwire against, but what exactly is the balun for?  The antenna
> is inherently unbalanced, and I assume you aren't trying to feed it from
> a balanced line.  And random longwires aren't exactly know for their
> well-controlled radiation patterns, so I assume it isn't like you are
> real worried about keeping antenna currents off other things, so long
> as you're not getting RF burns from your rig when it tries to make you
> a part of the antenna system.

The MLB is a receive-only gadget, not designed to handle significant
power. Although RF Systems call it a "balun", it is really an
unbalanced-to-unbalanced matching transformer. There is a better built
lower cost device of this sort made by ICE, and it is also pretty easy to
make your own: look in "http://www.grove.net/~badx/" under "Low Noise
Antennas".

A fixed matching transformer of this sort allows you to use coaxial cable
to feed signals from your antenna, supressing near field and conducted
interference (be sure to do a good job of grounding the coaxial shield for
best results). A coax-fed long wire without such a transformer has
mismatch losses ranging from 0 dB at resonances to about 15 dB at
antiresonances. With a matching transformer of this type, losses are
nearly constant at 4-6 dB if the antenna is longer than 1/4 wavelength. A
loss of 15 dB can have a detrimental effect, but 6 dB is rarely a problem
at frequencies below 30 MHz since it reduces both noise and signal. The
sensitivity of most receivers is enough below the natural noise floor that
6 dB of loss has no practical effect on the received signal to noise
ratio.

--
John Doty               "You can't confuse me, that's my job."
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:33 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!agate!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.infi.net!usenet
From: Scott Ryan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: Re: Low cost balun for random wire
Date: 14 Sep 1996 12:41:58 GMT
Organization: InfiNet
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <51e96m$[e-mail]>
References: <51a3lp$[e-mail]> <51a8ld$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pa1dsp11.cid.infi.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]
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24213 rec.radio.shortwave:78561

Michael,

Thanks for the advice.  I guess the main reason for using an MLB was to
"adapt" the random wire to a coax feed, so I can install an air gap
lightning arrestor.

Is there a effective way to use a lightning arrestor without an MLB?  Can
I connect the center conductor of the coax and leave the shield
un-connected without losing lightning protection?



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:35 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.ultranet.com!bigboote.WPI.EDU!cam-news-feed2.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: MFJ-259 Question
Date: 17 Sep 1996 17:03:25 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 24
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <51n3mt$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

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

>Has anybody had the opportunity to check the accuracy of the freq.
>counter of the MFJ-259?  The first one I had was about 33 parts per
>million high; the second one is about 5 ppm low.  Manual says it should
>be 1 ppm.  Local dealer says I am expecting too much... and is the gate
>adjustable? .. and is the span of the resistance meter adjustable? The
>resistance says 45 ohms at 1:1 match into my dummy load... not a big deal

>but seems like it could be better....
>
>

The counter's stability, as speced from the counter module manufacturer,
is 1 ppm per year when operated at room temperature.

Unfortunately when preesed they admit they often don't calibrate them that
close, so the spec really winds up being the drift, not the accuracy as
shipped. If the counter is individually calibrated, then it should be 1
ppm, at least that's what the counter vendor claims.

There is a pot that sets the reistance meter.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:35 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsserver.pixel.kodak.com!news.thenet.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.gtn.com!RRZ.Uni-Koeln.DE!news.dfn.de!news.dkrz.de!news.rrz.uni-hamburg.de!news.Hanse.DE!mwhh!dk3uz!ehramm
From: [e-mail] (Edmund H. Ramm)
Subject: Re: Novice: Hallicrafters
X-Newsreader: nn 6.4.18
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Private Linux/68k site
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 20:38:29 GMT
Lines: 13

[e-mail] writes:

> My old man has a 40 year old short wave Hallicrafters radio with big knobs,
> [...]

   If he ever decides to throw it away, please remember to tell me where and
how far he intends to throw it, so I can be in the right place to catch it!

   73, Eddi
--
   [e-mail] - [e-mail] - DK3UZ@DB0HHT.#HH.GER.EU
               Linux/m68k, the best U**x ever to hit an Atari!
    Distribution of this message via the Microsoft Network is prohibited


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:37 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!arclight.uoregon.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!spool.mu.edu!newspump.sol.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!swrinde.nde.swri.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Quadrifilar Helix
Date: 17 Sep 96 01:34:13 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]


[Reply for: Ed Nowicki [e-mail]]

Hi Ed, sorry to take so long to reply, normal fubar here...
The small loop has to go inside the larger one; it won't go otherwise.  I
used RG-58 all the way around, instead of rg8  + small wire.  I cut the
large wire and small wire separately.  I used a gdo to measure the resonant
frequency of the separate wires.  I mounted the small loop first, making an
incision midway for connecting the other loop.  I did the large loop the same
making the connections as in the article.  The article was by far the
clearest illustation of any book I've seen with the QF.  I made each loop
an extra inch longer intentionally, for pruning, and general errors due to
connecting, soldering, etc.  The small loop was exactly centered inside the
large loop, as close as I can measure. I fed all eight end pieces inside,
not outside, each spreader.  I cut away a middle section of each spreader to
feed the coax out to be spliced to the other loop.  Both spreader cuts are
still inside the main boom.  I mounted the SO-239 on the main boom just below
one of the spreaders.  I wanted to leave one side of the boom long, for ease
of mounting.  I had to cut if off to get inside, for splicing the two loops.
The extra inch brings the antenna in about 10 MHz low, until I trim it.

I do plan to build the 440 version next, using the same construction, for
receiving UO-22, etc.  Later, I plan to build two other versions.

  1. Four QF's mounted in a square, phased, for extra gain.
  2. A QF 4 wavelengths long instead of 1, also for more gain, by extending
     the boom length.(QuadraQuadrafilar)

How would a QF work with a relector dish?

I've done some spotty testing using the 137.5 satellite, and the pattern
seems to be about what it should be.  I need to update my kepler set, but
it seems to run just above the horizon a couple of degrees before dropping
out.

TS



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:42 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!spool.mu.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!nntp.earthlink.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: Re: Random longwire/coax lead
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 17:48:25 GMT
Organization: Earthlink Network, Inc.
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <51k3f5$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: max1-ot-ca-14.earthlink.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24211 rec.radio.shortwave:78554

Scott Ryan <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Thank's for everyone's help on my last post (cheap balun for longwire).
>Sunday I connected my random longwire to my receiver with R58 coax from
>receiver to a lightning arrester, then another piece of coax from the
>arrester to the longwire.  Instead of a balun at the connection, I
>stripped the end of the coax & soldered it to the longwire.  The antenna
>end of the shield is left unconnected.

>Now my longwire is dead!  I get a much stronger signal with the attached
>whip on my SW8.  I tested all connecters for shorts, checked resistance
>from antenna through the arrester, etc.  Then I used a jumper wire
>(insulated wire) between antenna & the arrester & my signal came back
>stronger then ever.

>Any ideas on why I'm having this problem?  I should add that I'm not
>very technical.
Very simply, you cannot feed a HIGH impedance signal into a LOW
impedance input without losing 90 percent of your signal.   You mjust
either lose the coax or use a matching transformer where your random
wire (600 Ohms nominal) connects to your RG-58 (50 Ohms nominal).
There are commercially available units that perform this task.  See
MLB discussions in this newsgroup.
dr
Dave Rickmers            I'd wake up and
[e-mail]   there'd be nothing...



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:43 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!rain.fr!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-9.sprintlink.net!blixen.aquilagroup.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Kevin  AstirCS "1U"   KO0B)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: RG/6 buriable coax from RS?
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 15:05:07 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: Aquila Technologies Group, Inc.
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <51ci0o$[e-mail]>
References: <516o2q$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: thoreau.aquilagroup.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.38

Nicholas Negus <[e-mail]> wrote:


>If you've got to dig a trench anyway, I suggest that you get some cheap
>plastic rain water pipe and put that in first with a draw string to pull
>the cables through.

Limp string, like braided nylon cord is pretty easy to install in
conduit if you suck it in with a vacuum cleaner.

-KF-



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:44 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.cdsnet.net!news.magicnet.net!news1.good.net!news.good.net!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.winterlan.com!frii.com!usenet
From: Avatar <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Salt water beam
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 12:12:33 -0700
Organization: Front Range Internet, Inc.
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <51d6fc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftc-46.ppp.frii.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; U)

Kc4ymb wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> My father-in-law lives in Florida and is planning to put up an HF beam. He
> lives on the coast and is worried about corrosion so I was wondering if
> anyone had any experience with different brands of antennas near salt
> water. Any help would be appreciated.
>
> 73
>
> Tom, KC4YMB

Hi Tom,

He has valid concern. All of the beams I'm familiar with use 6061 or 6063
grade aluminum. That does not mean there aren't any made of stainless.
Maybe someone else is more currently informed.

The first thought that came to me was to cap the ends of the elements and
the boom; and then coat it with epoxy resin. There may be better coatings
to use. Unfortunately, there are other components besides the beam that
will be subject to corrosion. You might want to contact the tower
manufacturers to learn how well a the galvanized towers withstand salt
air too.

Good luck,
W0MAY




From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:45 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news1.radix.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Chuck Spafford)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: simple SW ant for apartment dweller.
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 08:57:21 GMT
Organization: Cen-Trex Computer Services
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <51ene9$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialin19.annex1.radix.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/16.227

On Sat, 14 Sep 1996 23:47:29 GMT Eric Oyen wrote in
rec.radio.amateur.antenna:

>I am lloking for design plans for a simple Shortwave receiving antenna for "i
n the
>apartment" use. What I would like should follow these guidlines:

Do what I did before I got my ticket.  Get a long piece of wire, the
longer the better, and stick one end in the antenna ouput on the
receiver and lay the other end around the floor at the base of the
wall.  I used about a 200 foot section of somethiing like 12g wire and
it worked beautifully!  I still use a long wire antenna for receiving
when it comes to tough DX.  A big DXer friend of mine use about a 500
foot section of wire for listening.



73, de Chuck Spafford
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:46 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!nwnews.wa.com!nwfocus.wa.com!golden.ncw.net!usenet
From: Jack Clevenger <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Vertical Troubles
Date: 15 Sep 1996 09:37:16 GMT
Organization: North Central Washington Network
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <51gioc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wenuser09.ncw.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; U; 16bit)

     Help! I just installed a hy-gain OMNI DX-88 in my backyard. The
problem is high SWR on all bands. The backyard is like a river bed, all
rocks and no soil. I installed all 16 radials at 14 feet long as
recommended. Still getting a high SWR I decided to haul in some soil and
cover the radials so they would make better contact with the earth, or
should I say the dry river bed. Still no better. Should I start working
with another antenna, I would really appreciate some suggestions. I know
the conditions are not ideal.

TNX  Jack KB7DSU Please E-MAIL   73's



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:46 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.zeitgeist.net!news.terminus.com!usenet
From: "Robert McFaddin" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: vhf beam matching
Date: 16 Sep 1996 23:18:34 GMT
Organization: Unknown Organization
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <01bba429$82e6d180$3306bccc@mcfaddin>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sb-2.impulse.net
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

Does someone out there have a simple matching technique for vhf beams. I
have tried in the past the gamma and delta with some success. Plans would
be appreciated.
Thanks


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:47 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!newsfeed1.aimnet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!swrinde.nde.swri.edu!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!ix.netcom.com!news
From: KD1YV <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.space
Subject: Western Connecticut Hamfest this Sunday!
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 00:22:04 -0300
Organization: Hamily !
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dby-ct1-05.ix.netcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri Sep 13  9:24:30 PM PDT 1996
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win16; I)
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:106668 rec.radio.swap:72698 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24184 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:16717 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:16954 rec.radio.amateur.space:7490

THE WESTERN CONNECTICUT HAMFEST
Sponsored by the Candlewood Amateur Radio Association

Just 14 miles from the NY/CT State line!

Sunday, Sept. 15, 1996                      0900-1400
Edmond Town Hall                 Route 6, Newtown, CT
Tables inside                      Tailgating outside
ARRL Sanctioned                    Handicapped Access
Door Prizes                             Ample Parking
Gourmet Fare                            Rain or shine

Talk-in 147.12/.72 PL 141.3

General admission $4.00 at the door (what a deal!)

Tailgating $6.00, inside table reservations $10.00 each, (both
include 1 admission), mail to:
Candlewood Amateur Radio Association, PO BOX 3441, Danbury CT 06813

For more info, phone [phone] or [phone].

Hope to see you all there.
73 de KD1YV
Jim


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:49 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.corpcomm.net!news.gate.net!news
From: KJ4WH <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What is best 40M wire
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 18:02:09 -0400
Organization: CyberGate, Inc.
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <51jvks$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wthfl2-49.gate.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] wrote:
> Are the 35 foot poles, by accident, a quarter wave apart, or so, such that
> they could be shortened to the right length to make them quarter wave
> elements for 40 meters, insulated off the guys and fed as shunt fed vertical
s
> in a phased array???
>
> They do NOT have to be insulated at the bases.  You can feed them as a
> solid grounded pole with a gamma match section against a reasonable number
> of radials under them and it WILL get you gain and directivity.
>
> I've used a 4 element phased array of this for years at W5WQN.  It has place
d
> as high as 6th or 7th single band 40M in the CQ WW behind W5RR in Dallas
> who was 3rd.  He was using four 150 foot towers with eight 3 element
> 40 meter rotary arrays stacked two per tower all rotating in echelon for tha
t
> contest...
>
> If you can figure out a phase feed and angles for your pole separation such
> that you can throw a lobe into Europe, my bet is your score on 40 will go
> WAY up, but maybe you have a salt flat overview of Europe anyway...
>
>     :)
>
> Mike @ W5WQN
> [e-mail]
> [e-mail]

Mike,  Thanks for the idea.  I never even considered using the poles as
verticals.  I'll have to do some reading on the physical setup and shunt
feeding, but it is certainly worth a look and try.  The reason I said
toward Europe is because that is where I expect to get many of my QSO's
and multipliers.  I already have a Cushcraft A4S with the 40M add-on
(basically a rotatable dipole) for working the Caribe and other in close
stations.

Thanks again for the idea and hope to see u in the test.  This will be
my first CQWW in a long time.  Last two years I've been in Grand Cayman
working Multi-multi as ZF2JI (1994) and multi-single as ZF2DX (1995).

Gary KJ4WH


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:54 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.myriad.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What is best 40M wire
Date: 16 Sep 1996 16:35:40 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <51jvks$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr15s1.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <[e-mail]>, KJ4WH <[e-mail]> writes:
>I am looking to improve my station for CQWW and want to add something
>with more gain (towards Europe only) for 40 meters.  I am looking for
>suggestions on various wire designs others have used (i.e. wire beam, 2
>element wire yagi, ?????.) I don't have a lot of room (1/2 acre) and
>currently have a 40 ft tower and two 35 ft telescoping poles.  I
>welcome any and all advice.
>
>Gary KJ4WH (till the vanity call comes)
>Lakeland,  Fl.

Are the 35 foot poles, by accident, a quarter wave apart, or so, such that
they could be shortened to the right length to make them quarter wave
elements for 40 meters, insulated off the guys and fed as shunt fed verticals
in a phased array???

They do NOT have to be insulated at the bases.  You can feed them as a
solid grounded pole with a gamma match section against a reasonable number
of radials under them and it WILL get you gain and directivity.

I've used a 4 element phased array of this for years at W5WQN.  It has placed
as high as 6th or 7th single band 40M in the CQ WW behind W5RR in Dallas
who was 3rd.  He was using four 150 foot towers with eight 3 element
40 meter rotary arrays stacked two per tower all rotating in echelon for that
contest...

If you can figure out a phase feed and angles for your pole separation such
that you can throw a lobe into Europe, my bet is your score on 40 will go
WAY up, but maybe you have a salt flat overview of Europe anyway...

    :)

Mike @ W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:55 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.myriad.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What is best 40M wire
Date: 18 Sep 1996 04:59:23 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <51nvjb$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup510.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Barry Anderson) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>> I am looking to improve my station for CQWW and want to add
>something
>> with more gain (towards Europe only) for 40 meters.  I am
>looking for
>> suggestions on various wire designs others have used (i.e.
>wire beam, 2
>> element wire yagi, ?????.) I don't have a lot of room (1/2
>acre) and
>> currently have a 40 ft tower and two 35 ft telescoping
>poles.  I
>> welcome any and all advice.
>>
>> Gary KJ4WH (till the vanity call comes)
>> Lakeland,  Fl.
>
>Gary ...
>
>    If you have the room, try a bobtail curtain. It works
>pretty good and is pretty simple to build.
>
>
>--
>Barry Anderson K3SUI
>Frederick, MD. 21702
>[e-mail]

I'll second that notion.  Other than the bi-directional throw, they are a lot
of fun, simple and DO have gain at little expense, if you have the supports
in the right places...

  :)

Mike @ W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:55 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news1.erols.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!hookup!news.nstn.ca!newsflash.concordia.ca!sunqbc.risq.net!pegasus.odyssee.net!news
From: MADJID VE2GMI <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: What Software for "Designing" Yagi Antennas?
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 18:07:52 -0400
Organization: ORION Microsystems
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <5196rj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pool24_3.odyssee.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; I)
To: [e-mail]

Mark Moulding wrote:
>
> Looking for a program to help design a couple of VHF Yagi antennas.
> Am looking to optimize number of elements, spacing, and F/S, F/B, and
> Max gain on short booms. ie 12 feet.   I seem to recall a program by
> K1FO or a pgm that he used or could of used to design antennas similar
> to his long ones in qst several years ago.
>
> Thanks, Mark, KE7NS

there is YAGI/YAGI max on the ARRL FTP site
http://oak.oakland.edu:8080/pub/hamradio/arrl/bbs/programs/yagim311.zip


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:56 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!tezcat!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-feed2.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.bctel.net!news.mag-net.com!ve7tcp.ampr.org!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Mike Hughes)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WTT: Mac SE
Date: 16 Sep 96 18:24:35 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

I have a Macintosh SE with 4 meg memory and a 80meg Hard Drive. Would
like to trade for a good 2 Meter unit. Prefer 40+ Watts out, Tone Encode,
Synthesized.


Mike Hughes, WF5P
211 Woodland Drive
Lowell, IN 46356
[phone]


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:57 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!swrinde.nde.swri.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 "help - fixing hifi interference"
Date: 17 Sep 96 04:26:26 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

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


From [e-mail] Thu Sep 19 18:06:58 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!metro.atlanta.com!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!cs.utk.edu!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!van-bc!unixg.ubc.ca!aurora.cs.athabascau.ca!news.mag-net.com!ve7tcp.ampr.org!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: Listserv@ucsd (Mailing List Processor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: your LISTSERV request "help on vertical runs of 9913"
Date: 14 Sep 96 18:37:57 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.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] Fri Sep 27 21:52:30 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!metro.atlanta.com!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!spool.mu.edu!newspump.sol.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: "capture area"?
Date: 19 Sep 1996 13:49:35 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 39
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <51s13f$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

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

>
>Yes, as other posters have pointed out, I used the wrong term for the
area
>inside the loop.  But my question remains.  If only the geometry is
altered,
>should I see a noticeable amount of change in transmit/receive signal?
Does
>anyone know why, in some loop antenna articles, we're advised to arrange
the
>loop to enclose maximum area?
>
>73 and thanks
>--
>.........Monty.

Yes, antennas radiate because of charge acceleration. The longer and
straighter distance charges are accelerated over (the greater the spacial
area) the larger the radiation effect.

Making the antenna as large and straight as possible improves this, as
well as the fact directivity is improved in a full wave loop because the
average separation distance between in phase radiators is increased closer
to the optimum value.

Remember a full wave loop is really two bent dipoles fed in-phase. The
highest broadside gain with two in-phase dipoles ocurs when the dipoles
are between 1/2 and 3/4 of a wave apart, so the quad really "needs" to be
that spacing for peak performance. The problem is when you stretch the
current points apart, you fold the ends of the dipoles in making them
shorter. That lowers the efficiency and beamwidth of each dipole.

Somewhere, and I'm not sure off-hand exactly where, there would be an
optimum dimension and shape. I expect it (by intuition) to be a circle if
the conductor has very low loss.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:32 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ro.com!news
From: "John D. Farr" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: "capture area"?
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 01:34:52 -0500
Organization: RENAISSANCE INTERNET SERVICES
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <51q7va$[e-mail]> <51qmt9$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ts1p1.ro.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Anthony R. Gold wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] "John D. Farr" writes:
>
> > In radar, we use the term effective area, A_e.  It is related to the
> > wavelength,
> > lambda, and the isotropic gain, g, by
> >
> > A_e = g * lambda^2 / (4 * Pi).
> >
> > With an aperature antenna, such as a dish or a horn, A_e is related to
> > the actual
> > area by
> >
> > A = A_e * rho
> >
> > where rho is the antenna efficiency.
>
> So the effective area is *reduced* if the efficiency increases?  Nah!
>
> How about    A_e = A * rho  instead?
>
> Well, it seems tidier to me anyway :-)
>
> Regards,
> --
>    Tony - G3SKR / AA2PM                  email: [e-mail]
>                                                 [e-mail]
>                                         packet: g3skr@n0ary.#nocal.ca.usa.na

Yep indeed. It is A_e = A * rho.
I knew I should have looked it up!
John



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:33 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.sgi.com!enews.sgi.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: [e-mail] (George Sereikas)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: RE: "Screwdriver" Mobile Antennas - Experiences
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 02:27:53 GMT
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <529qq2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 78.new-york-009.ny.dial-access.att.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Hello!
I am seriously considering purchasing a "screwdriver" type mobile
antenna, a la Don Johnson. There are now several manufacturers, e.g.,
High Sierra, TJ Antennas, H. Stewart and perhaps others that I have
not even heard of. I would appreciate feedback from people have used
any of these antennas. Any recommendations, good points/bad points,
etc.

You can post it here for all to see or benefit from or send info to
via email: [e-mail]. Thanks much, I would really
appreciate your input.

73,
George
KC2MF




From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:34 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news1.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!portal.gmu.edu!mason2.gmu.edu!cshelton
From: [e-mail] (Carroll J Shelton)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: "Spider" antenna
Date: 24 Sep 1996 21:37:18 GMT
Organization: George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, USA
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <529kae$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mason2.gmu.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]


Does anyone have personal experience with the "Spider" multi-
band mobile/limited space antenna?  It's frequently advertised
in QST as an alternative to the usual bugcatchers, etc.

I'm interested in this not for mobiling, but as an attic HF
antenna, so I would particularly like to hear from anyone who
has used two of these in a "dipole" configuration.

                Jeff Shelton/KS4TL
                [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:35 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!scnews.sc.intel.com!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: "Spider" antenna
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 15:07:02 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <529kae$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: camoore-desk.ch.intel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

Carroll J Shelton wrote:
> Does anyone have personal experience with the "Spider"...
> I'm interested in this ... as an attic HF antenna,...

Hi Jeff, IMO you would put out a lot more signal for a lot
less money using an attic dipole fed with ladder-line. The
longer a shortened antenna is, the better it performs. Surely
you have more than 16ft of attic space.

73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:35 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news1.mnsinc.com!usenet
From: KI4RO John <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 160M dipole shortened...How to ?
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1996 08:50:11 -0700
Organization: Monumental Network Systems
Lines: 11
Distribution: inet
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ki4ro.mnsinc.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)
To: scott <[e-mail]>

Scott,
        I don't where your interest lies on 160, but if you have enough room
for a 130 foot dipole you should seriously consider putting up a
vertical radiator.  On 160 if you're interested in talking to anyone
more than about 500 miles away, a vertical is the way to go.
        Put out an 80 foot horizontal wire.  Straight down from the middle of
that wire solder a 40 foot wire.  Feed the base with about 20
microhenrys of inductance and you're in business.  Try to get at least 4
radials under it of about 125' in length.
        See you soon on the Top Band!
        John KI4RO


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:36 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!metro.atlanta.com!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!hubcap.clemson.edu!info.uah.edu!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!miwok!news.mcn.org!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Dan Richardson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 160M dipole shortened...How to ?
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1996 12:53:24 GMT
Organization: LPS Systems
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <520rpf$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm2-men-a15.mcn.org
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

scott <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Is there a handy formula to calculate how much inductance to add to a
>160M dipole so that it is resonant and only about 130 feet in length?
>Also, where is the best and easiest place to put the loading coils in
>each leg?

>[Snip]

>All Info APPRECIATED !

>Scott, N0EDV

Scott you can down load a program called HamCalc from various amateur
radio BBS.

HamCalc contains several useful programs one of which will calculate
the amount of inductance and placement of loading coils for short
dipoles.

73

Danny, K6MHE



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:37 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.iadfw.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (J. Fred Riley)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 160M dipole shortened...How to ?
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 04:00:37 GMT
Organization: INTERNET AMERICA
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <522dl2$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <520rpf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dal03-25.ppp.iadfw.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

>scott <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Also, where is the best and easiest place to put the loading coils in
>each leg?

Having used a shortened antenna, I would recommend you place the
loading coils out about 15' from the ends.  Ground effects will always
vary and the antenna will require pruning.  The 15' of wire on the
ends makes pruning easy.  You should prepare yourself for a fairly
limited VSWR bandwidth.  Mine was configured in an inverted V
arrangement and tuned to 1880.  Operating below 1845 required that I
attach clip-on extention pieces to the end of the antenna.  That's not
a very efficient process but it worked fine for me.



Fred

[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:38 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!dimensional.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Richard MacDonald)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 160M dipole shortened...How to ?
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 10:03:54 -0600
Organization: Dimensional Communications
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <520rpf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: p02.pm-4.pm.dimensional.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227

On Sat, 21 Sep 1996 12:53:24 GMT, [e-mail] (Dan Richardson) wrote:

>scott <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>>Is there a handy formula to calculate how much inductance to add to a
>>160M dipole so that it is resonant and only about 130 feet in length?
>>Also, where is the best and easiest place to put the loading coils in
>>each leg?
>
>>[Snip]
>
>>All Info APPRECIATED !
>
>>Scott, N0EDV
>
>Scott you can down load a program called HamCalc from various amateur
>radio BBS.
>
>HamCalc contains several useful programs one of which will calculate
>the amount of inductance and placement of loading coils for short
>dipoles.
>
>73
>
>Danny, K6MHE
>

Hamcalc is available on the Internet at:
http://uhavax.hartford.edu/disk$userdata/faculty/eetsw/www/welcome.html

Just follow the link to the next page, click on the link to see how to unzip i
t
properly then back up one page, go to the bottom of the page and click on the
download link to get it. This sounds more complicated than it really is.




From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:39 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: "DR. DAVE" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 160M LOOP or NOT ?
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1996 21:01:09 -0400
Organization: COMPUTER DIAGNOSTICS
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 34.middletown-64.va.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E (Win95; U)

KI4RO John wrote:
>
> Scott,
>         I don't where your interest lies on 160, but if you have enough room
> for a 130 foot dipole you should seriously consider putting up a
> vertical radiator.  On 160 if you're interested in talking to anyone
> more than about 500 miles away, a vertical is the way to go.
>         Put out an 80 foot horizontal wire.  Straight down from the middle o
f
> that wire solder a 40 foot wire.  Feed the base with about 20
> microhenrys of inductance and you're in business.  Try to get at least 4
> radials under it of about 125' in length.
>         See you soon on the Top Band!
>         John KI4RO


I put up a 160 meter Dipole @ 1.8 Mhz. Now I had to use a Balun but it was a
4:1 its all I had at the time. I haven't used it yet to talk on. It recieves
great. Will this be a problem 0n transmit? Should I make a loop from this by
adding another 1/2 wave of wire and string it horizonal. Also found this to
have a great recieve on other bands.
                                        Dave


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:40 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.sgi.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!ix.netcom.com!news
From: "L. Schopfer" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 160M Mobile Antenna
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 08:41:34 -0700
Organization: Larax Software
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: whp-ny2-01.ix.netcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-NETCOM-Date: Tue Sep 24  7:40:24 AM CDT 1996
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I; 16bit)

Any suggestions on a good 160 mobile antenna?  Thanks.

Larry Schopfer
N2AZS/1

--
Larax Software's web site features Company News and Information,
Net Tools and Larax's Investor Trade School:

http://www.larax.com/


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:41 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!enews.sgi.com!news.sgi.com!news1.best.com!news.thenet.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!news-in.iadfw.net!dal14-05.ppp.iadfw.net!user
From: [e-mail] (cleve e massey)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 6 mtr. antenna thoughts
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 00:16:00 -0500
Organization: INTERNET AMERICA
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dal14-05.ppp.iadfw.net

Have been having a blast with six meter for almost two years now...and the
introduction of the DX-70 and 706 have really increased activity on the
band...

I know the golden rule that horizontal is for SSB and CW and vertical for
FM...but how about this.  At least here in Dallas there is about the same
amount of SSB and FM activity...most of those folks have rigs that will
run both modes...

So if we use a vertical antenna, then we can do the FM easily...mobile it
would be a better signal to a vertical antenna at a home QTH...and when
the E-skip is in it seems to me that it doesn't make any difference what
the polarization is...so except for the SSB QSO's from one home QTH to
another where some of us already have horizontal antennas, would it not
make more sense for everyone to have a vertical antenna???

Just food for thought...

Let's hope for some E-skip before Christmas...

cleve/wd5bor


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:42 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.sgi.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!nntp-hub.barrnet.net!informix.com!informix.com!news
From: Randall Rhea <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 6m questions
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 19:44:52 -0600
Organization: Informix Software, Inc. Menlo Park, CA 94025
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <523qff$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.147.101.98
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.equipment:32532 rec.radio.amateur.misc:106954 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24350

Another good, quick intro to 6m is

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/rhea/sixmeter.htm

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Randall Rhea                             Informix Software, Inc.
Systems Engineer, Dallas, Texas          [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:43 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!rain.fr!jussieu.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!howland.erols.net!news1.erols.com!netaxs.com!news.fast.net!news
From: "Andy and Sherry" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: ???looking for plans for 2m yagi.....
Date: 22 Sep 1996 19:42:29 GMT
Organization: FASTNET(tm) PA/NJ/DE Internet
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <01bba8bc$d039fd80$29df93cd@andysher>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-abe-341.fast.net
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

I'm looking for detailed plans on 10 or 12 element yagi ant. which use a
metal boom. I have search the web. and newsgroups got some info. , none of
it complete . I've looked in arrl ant. handbook and it has to much math and
experementing. Thank you for your help and time. You can post replys here
or e-mail me at
                         [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:43 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!worldlinx.com!torn!news.uunet.ca!spool.mu.edu!newspump.sol.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.pitt.edu!news.pgh.net!usenet
From: Edward Oros <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Design Software
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 08:47:02 -0400
Organization: Pittsburgh OnLine, Inc.
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <516sj9$[e-mail]> <517385$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp2.pgh.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b8Gold (Win95; I)

Dwight R. Hayes, Jr. wrote:
>
> Please Post Responses to Usenet - others would be interested (At least,
> myself).


> >Does anyone know if their are any low cost or shareware programs that would
 allow you to model / design various antenna constructions ?  73 WEP



You can model many antenna designs on the Web at


 http://www.qth.com/antenna



Ed--AC3L


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:44 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!tezcat!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!news2.digex.net!news6.digex.net!news.gteais.com!news
From: "Sub Zero" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Design Software
Date: 18 Sep 1996 16:49:19 GMT
Organization: gteais-org
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <01bba581$35173c20$455db5ce@reptile>
References: <516sj9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: r1p1.gteais.com
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

I have used Yagimax to model beam antennas.  I have used it to model 2
meter and 440 antennas for a club project.  We built 22 of each type!  I
then modeled and built a 34' long boomer for 2 meters with great success.
Yagimax is easy to use and is very visual, and is shareware.  Search for it
on the web.

Just my 2 cents,

Al, NW2M
http://www.dsport.com/marc/

------------------------------------------

[e-mail] wrote in article <516sj9$[e-mail]>...
>
> Does anyone know if their are any low cost or shareware programs that
would allow you
> to model / design various antenna constructions ?  73 WEP
>


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:45 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.erols.net!news1.erols.com!hunter.premier.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!InforMNs.k12.MN.us!msp1-9.nas.mr.net!user
From: [e-mail] (Sharon Phelps)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna Interaction question
Date: 20 Sep 1996 19:25:03 GMT
Organization: Chanhassen Elementary School
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: msp1-9.nas.mr.net

I'm not sure if this was actualy posted earlier or not so I'll try again.

I'm soon to hang an 80M loop in my back yard. It will hang vertically
along the west side of my property. My question is this: If I decide to
put other antennas up in my yard or on the roof of my house, how will this
big loop affect the pattern of the smaller antennas?  The big loop will be
hanging east-west and if I want to aim anything toward Europe from here,
it will be pointing "through" the loop.

Thanks for any help you can give with this question.

Mark,  N0YRW

--
sap/chanelem/librarymediaspec.


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:46 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!enews.sgi.com!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.myriad.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Anyone used loops in echelon?
Date: 22 Sep 1996 15:40:01 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <523mkh$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr15s5.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

Has anyone here actually built and used an array of loops in echelon?  If you
have the experience, was the polarity vertical or horizontal?  If you have
any feedback on it, how did they compare on receiving between a beverage
and/or the phased vertical arrays on 80 or 160..

At my QTH I have the space for beverages, but my terrain has a horrible
horizontal profile.  I'm in a creek bottom area which has lots of ups and
downs and ravines over which they would pass.

I wanted to try one to see how much quieter they might be than my 4 square
on receive.  I'm way out in the country so the 4 square has nil man-made
noise to cope with, generally.  That doesn't mean I can't find something
better.   I'm sure you know the story...

  :)

At the company, we make polo trailers....  for years, I've heard, not enough
room, not enough room, not enough horses..... If I only had enough room for
a couple more horses....

  :)

//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:47 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!newspump.sol.net!chi-news.cic.net!news.nd.edu!news
From: "Dan P. Sumption" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Apartment 2m/440 antenna
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 14:45:43 -0500
Organization: University of Notre Dame
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: tc6-7.tc.nd.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I)

I have just moved into an apartment where I have to deal with
restrictions for antennas outside (NONE!!!)  Does anyone know of or have
homebrew plans for a good 2m/440 dual band antenna that will function
good inside an apartment?

Thanks!  73's

Dan Sumption
KA9YDI

EMAIL: [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:48 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!scnews.sc.intel.com!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Apartment 2m/440 antenna
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 11:20:52 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: camoore-desk.ch.intel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

Clint Bradford wrote:
> Copied off of ATTENTION to Details BBS at 909-681-6221:
> I've have good results on both 2m and 440.  It's only designed for 2m,
> but my SWR was actually lower on 440.

Hi Clint, unfortunately a 2m J-Pole, when used on 440, radiates most
of the RF at a take-off-angle of about 45 degrees. SWR doesn't tell
you how well the antenna is working. Wonder what "good results on...
440" really means compared to a 440 J-Pole.

73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:49 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.sgi.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: 23 Sep 1996 23:25:22 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 21
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <527kb2$[e-mail]>
References: <523t5l$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <523t5l$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
writes:

>>  So, at the 1/4, 1/2, 3/4, etc., lengths, no
>>balun is required to stop the feedline from radiating.
>
>That is totally untrue.
>
>The impedance of the line is the critical factor, as well as the
>termination. The line radiates, as well as dissipates, power. That means
>the impedance can NOT be infinite  even if it a length that maximizes
>impedance at the common mode current source. If the coaxial line is
>terminated in a PERFECT "ground" or low impedance electrical mass 1/4 wl
>below the feedpoint, feedline radiation will be MINIMIZED for that
>configuration but NOT zero.  If it is terminated the same way 1/2 wL
>(electrical) below the antenna, radiation will be maximized.
>
>

In this are by impedance I meant common mode impedance, I should have said
common mode.


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:50 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.erols.net!surfnet.nl!swidir.switch.ch!in2p3.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!jussieu.fr!news.forth.gr!news-ath.forthnet.gr!news.compulink.gr!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Zacharias Liangas)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: beam ant, project:Yr advice pls
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 10:53:05 GMT
Organization: ME!!!!!
Lines: 62
Sender: [e-mail]
Distribution: world
Expires: 10 days
Message-ID: <528e8o$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: 195.212.240.17
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82



Dear friends


I have a big doubt so I post this masage here

   First lemme tell you my system configuration fr the moment before I
   advise you my problem :
   I use a SONY ICF 7600D , a Lowe HF150 and a Philips Magnavox 2395
   all are digital
   - wire antennas - of 6m sloped 60 deg paralel to az 120 deg - and a
   hor wire 13 m [aralel to 15 deg az .Both are  TV antenna mast
guides
   -home brewn ATU operating 2- 7 mHz for 20 - 5 dB respectively
   Palce of Reception ; Thessaloniki 40N 23E

   Due to my interest in SEA  I have the particular interest for
   listening to the folowing radio stations and under the condidtions
   as below :

   - STM / V o Malaysia ( dir 120 dg az) in 15295 at mean levels of 2-
   3 with QRMers as
   R Liberty  fgrom 15290  at levels S4-5 ( abt 15-25 dB more)
   R F I  from 15300 at nearly same as R L
   from varius hand made account-ments I understood that a great
   amount of signal abt 50-60% is lost due to possible reflexions
   coming from the city's mountains at an angle of 270-025 deg az

-RRI Jakarta in 9680  at mean levels (not always receivable) of S1-2
   Only V of Turkey is QRMer at 9675 but not always QRMing due to very
   low mod

- R Singapore  in 6000 at mean levels  of S2to 3 with
   Deutschlandfunk in 6005 (S4) as the only QRMer or sometimes
   Radio Dubai at 6000  but at verylow level

   I asked  the experts  of my city for making a common antenna
constru
   ction for  these 3 freqs of a antenna individual per band , I also
   read  many boks abt antennas found solutions  but most of them  are
un-
   suitable  for  my  place ( they were quad - X beam  for example) as
I
   have minimal  room in  the 7  level building and possibly can use
only
   small constructions  of  no more than 4 x 4 sqm

   PLease help me , and suggest a good protype fr beam antenna(s)
under
   the above conditions
   Thank you in advance

   [e-mail]
PLEASE ADIVSE ME YOUR OPINIONS BY EMAIL ONLY !

======
test for 8-bit
µß≈ß±Θß≥ δΘ▄πΩß≥
Zakaria Liang!
(namanya untuk kawan sahaja!)



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:51 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!ames!agate!info.ucla.edu!psgrain!nntp.teleport.com!usenet
From: "Dan Hearing" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: broadcast band DXing
Date: 21 Sep 1996 20:45:01 GMT
Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access [phone]
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <01bba7fd$7bc51a60$147da3ce@elendil>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx15-18.teleport.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

A friend is looking for an am car radio with high sensitivity and/or an
extremely efficient antenna.  Can anyone point me in the right direction?

Danny


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:52 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.pitt.edu!news.pgh.net!usenet
From: Edward Oros <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Build your own antennas!
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 13:01:15 -0400
Organization: Pittsburgh OnLine, Inc.
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp13.s7.pgh.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b8Gold (Win95; I)

Ready to design and build your own antennas?
Learn about dipoles, folded dipoles, inverted-vees,
half wave antennas, beams, etc. you can do it
yourself. Visit...


   http://www.qth.com/antenna


AC3L


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:53 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!barney.gvi.net!mv!news.NH.Destek.Net!mozart.jlc.net!news.intersurf.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (K1BQT)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Can I use my Discone Antenna for Television reception (audio & video)
Date: 18 Sep 1996 18:42:46 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 16
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <51ptt6$[e-mail]>
References: <51ph81$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (K1BQT)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hi--

Sure--go for it.  The Radio Shack antenna isn't a "real" discone because
it doesn't have enough radials to qualify.  However, it will probably work
for any local TV station that is transmitting using both vertical and
horizontal polarity (the discone is vertically polarized).  Don't bother
with the impedance match--the matching system will probably introduce more
loss than any VSWR you'll encounter.  Unlike TV-type log-periodic
antennas, the discone is not directional.  This means two things: (a.) you
wont be hauling in any weak signals, and (b.) if the terrain around your
house is conducive to "multipath" (AKA reflections), you may get some
ghosting on your video.

73,

Rick--K1BQT


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:56 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!swrinde!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx24-24
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Cheap Baluns
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 96 22:35:39 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <51shpb$[e-mail]>
References: <51qsrh$[e-mail]> <51rsub$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx24-24.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <51rsub$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:

>Speaking in general terms, most loads can not drive the balun with a low
>enough impedance source of high common mode voltage to ever create
>appreciable power loss.
>
>The problem is nearly always loss of balance, with heating a secondary
>concern. The heating is usually due to a small percentage of power being
>actually lost. If you visualize the surface area of a 100 watt light bulb,
>and compare that area and temperature to the external core area exposed to
>cooling air in a balun, you'll see even 10% of the power from a 1000 watt
>transmitter would make most baluns so hot they would quickly melt.
>
>If the balun is not melting, and you are running over a few hundred watts,
>power loss in the balun can be neglected. Voltage breakdown is the major
>short term failure mode.
>
>73 Tom

There's been a lot of arguing about this topic among some pretty well-informed

people, and as far as I can tell it's the "blind men and the elephant" problem

once again. As a QRP-type guy, I make baluns from low-frequency,
high-permeability material (e.g. Fair-Rite or Amidon 70-series ferrite). This
gives me a lot of impedance per turn squared on a toroid, or impedance per bea
d.
At HF and above, the impedance is resistive, not inductive. However, it's high

enough that it allows very little current flow in a moderate-Z system (that is
,
one with a roughly resonant antenna). The loss can be kept down to well under
a
dB -- low enough that even the purists aren't likely to argue that its loss is

significant. However, if you use one of these baluns in a system where you're
running 1500 W, even 0.1 dB of loss is 35 watts, enough to get a balun pretty
hot if you leave the key down (for those of you who still have keys). 0.5 dB
loss, which I still consider insignificant, means 183 watts to a (legal) juice
r.
So high-power folks need to make baluns out of less lossy material -- material

which has more inductive impedance -- such as Fair-Rite or Amidon 60-series
ferrite. The trade is that you don't get as much Z per turn or bead, so it's
hard to get a high Z to begin with. It's also hard to make it broadband, since

at the low end the Z is too low, and you see resonances at higher frequencies.

Some people even use type 2 powdered iron, but it would be very difficult to g
et
a very high Z with this material, even over a relatively narrow frequency rang
e.
The loss would be extremely low, however.

So, Tom (who doesn't even own any coax as small as RG-58) probably makes his
baluns from lower loss material than I do, and his statement is valid for his
baluns. But not for mine.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:58 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.mathworks.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!news.acsu.buffalo.edu!news.drenet.dnd.ca!crc-news.doc.ca!nott!bcarh189.bnr.ca!nrchh45.rich.nt.com!ferret.ocunix.on.ca!resurrect
From: Mark Pettigrew <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: alt.agriculture.misc,alt.folklore.herbs,alt.org.food-not-bombs,alt.save.the.earth,alt.sustainable.agriculture,austin.gardening,bionet.plants,bionet.plants.education,misc.health.alternative,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,sci.agriculture,soc.culture.korean,triangle.gardens,uk.rec.gardening
Subject: Re: Chitin Patented Product For Plants
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 15:53:24 -0700
Organization: Sheffield Hallam University
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lti-02.lti.shu.ac.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win16; I)
Xref: news2.epix.net alt.agriculture.misc:138 alt.folklore.herbs:31843 alt.org.food-not-bombs:2731 alt.save.the.earth:20976 alt.sustainable.agriculture:12297 austin.gardening:31 bionet.plants:11397 bionet.plants.education:714 misc.health.alternative:75913 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24328 sci.agriculture:11602 soc.culture.korean:91871 triangle.gardens:3112 uk.rec.gardening:4406

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.

James L Kistner wrote:
>
> Please check out a non-toxic product for plant growth.
> www.cei.net/~aware
>
> Excuse any cross posting.
>

Interesting cross-posting! How does rec.radio.amateur.antenna come to be
bundled in with bionet.plants or alt.folklore.herbs? By mistake?

Mark
G0WLR


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:59 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Current loop in open-circuit braid
Date: 21 Sep 1996 10:33:52 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 43
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <520ucg$[e-mail]>
References: <5206ru$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <5206ru$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
writes:

>gnd----100 volts +-------a------[[[[[[[[[--------b ---100 ohms--gnd
>to e  -------------------------c------[[[[[[[[[--------d ---100 ohms--e--
>(to c)
>
>And the same rules are true here. a to b is 50v with the + end at a, c to
>d is 50 volts with the + end at c (or e). Current is 1/2 ampere flowing
>the same direction past points a or c and b or d. The voltage from a/b
and
>c/d is equal and the same polarity. In the case above, the line radiates
>like a Mac Truck with chrome stacks smoking leaving a tunnel rather than
>like a toe nail clipper through a little pat of butter. (Just a comical
>insert)
>
>If we now place our black box generators between a,b and c,d and readjust
>each generator's voltage to a proper value we can stop all line radiation
>(assuming the lines are parallel, close and equal length). One voltage
>that would work is with "a" 0 volts to "b", and "c" +100 to "d". Another
>is "a" -50 to "b", and "c" +150 to "d". In this case the black box
>generators are required to be uneven in voltage and phase inverted. We
can
>see a balun following the rule (as all choke baluns must) that voltage
a/b
>= c/d can not possibly cause line currents to be equal and out of phase.
>Since we know (I hope) that currents must be equal and opposite or ANY
>line radiates, even a section of coaxial line will radiate when any balun
>is used with this source and load configuration.
>
>(Of course even if we balanced the lines at a c and b d with generators,
>another part of the system could radiate in the last example. The
parallel
>line sections would not).
>
>

I have a woops in this, but I'll correct it when I get back from the
racetrack Saturday.

So let's look at the other systems for now and see if we agree.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:52:59 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!metro.atlanta.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!news.physics.uiowa.edu!news.uiowa.edu!news
From: "William E. Sabin" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Current loop in open-circuit braid
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 06:09:21 -0700
Organization: none
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <524tfb$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-105.cedar-rapids.lib.ia.us
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; U)

WB3U wrote:
>
>    "William E. Sabin" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Hi Bill,
>
> Isn't this the same analysis you presented previously?  In
> case you didn't see my previous responses, I'll briefly restate
> my objections to this line of reasoning.
>

No. There is a lot of new material in the new article. I suggest you take
a good look at it.

Bill


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:00 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!news.mr.net!email.tds-eagan.lmco.com!usenet
From: Bob Salter <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: D&M Batwing: Operation Without Termination Block
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 09:08:54 -0700
Organization: Lockheed Martin Tactical Defense Systems, Eagan, MN  USA
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rsalter.tds-eagan.lmco.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win16; I)

Due to delivery problems we are forced to operate a DM 1501341 batwing
without the terminator block. Local opinions say VSWR suffers but
that the antenna would be usable. Any insight you can provide on
consequences of omitting the block would be welcome. EMAIL
[e-mail]. Thx.


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:01 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!demos!news.uni-stuttgart.de!news.ruhr-uni-bochum.de!crusher.et.ruhr-uni-bochum.de!mallon
From: Leif Mallon <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Dipole Animation?
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 10:36:59 +0200
Organization: Ruhr-Universitaet Bochum, Rechenzentrum
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: crusher.et.ruhr-uni-bochum.de
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

Hello,

I am looking for an animation (.avi or other pc-compatible formats), which
represents the characteristic of a HERTZ-dipole.
Maybe someone has seen something like that?

Leif.





From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:02 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!news.sgi.com!news.cs.indiana.edu!news.nstn.ca!coranto.ucs.mun.ca!news.unb.ca!fan1.fan.nb.ca!aa370
From: "Bruce W.L. Jack" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: RE: External TV Antenna Question
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 08:45:50 -0300
Organization: University of New Brunswick
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: fan1.fan.nb.ca
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>

> Bruce, I've never looked inside the Radio Shack model, but I am very =
> familiar with a product made by TDP which used to marketed under the RCA =
> name.  It's the round RV antenna you see a lot of.  Most every TV ENG =
> (electronic news gathaering) truck uses one of these antennas.  The VHF =
> portion is=20
> formed by what appears to be an attempt at a rhombic.  It uses a metal =
> band around the perimeter.  One end has a termination resistor, the =
> other end is connected to the internal preamp.  For UHF, a small yagi is =
> formed by pressing the elements into the top of the styrofoam.  I don't =
> think the UHF is amplified, just passed thru the preamp.  They are =
> pretty rugged, usually surviving about a year on a truck in my =
> experience before they rattle apart.  That assumes someone doesn't clip =
> them with something.  I'm told but, but have never seen this, that the =
> preamps can be damaged by overload from a very strong signal in the VHF =
> low band or high band.  The entire internal assembly is rotatable, by =
> the way with a simple hand control.  Will these perform as well as a =
> full size yagi?  Not a chance but they don't do a bad job.  They're also =
> not cheap, over $100 now.  You can buy a lot of conventional TV antenna =
> for $100.
>
> Hope this helps.
> de Rick, KN3C

 I see. I'm not sure what it was meant for but I think it could be either
home or RV. Thanx for the info, I guess its not quite as good as they
claim. (At least for what I want to get.)
    TTYL


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:03 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!idir.net!cypress.idir.net!n6yr
From: "James H. Canaday" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: folded dipole-HF-vertical?
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 02:01:20 -0500
Organization: Internet Direct Communications
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cypress.idir.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>

any one have any answers as to how  effective a vertical folded dipole
would be, compared to the standard quarterwave monopole-with say three
radials?
     would the vertical folded dipole tend to  transmit a lower angle of
radiation?
     thanks for any answers.
jc
James H. "Jim" Canaday M.A.          Lynda D. Canaday, coloratura soprano
Amateur Radio callsign: N6YR
Lawrence,  KS
E-mail: [e-mail]  *|* There is a telephone: [phone]
RACES Radio Officer, Douglas Co. KS-(Radio Amateur Civil Emergency Service)

-Home of-"M.C." party animal, and "Silk" the "little princess."
              Guide Dogs for the Blind, class 512R
                ^our dog guides^
                              ----------
Yes, Bob Dole really did play basketball in Lawrence, at Kansas University,
before he joined the military.




From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:04 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.winterlan.com!frii.com!usenet
From: Avatar <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: folded dipole-HF-vertical?
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1996 18:53:12 -0700
Organization: Front Range Internet, Inc.
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftc-14.ppp.frii.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; U)

James H. Canaday wrote:
>
> any one have any answers as to how  effective a vertical folded dipole
> would be, compared to the standard quarterwave monopole-with say three
> radials?

Three radials is not a very efficient counterpoise for a monopole.

>would the vertical folded dipole tend to  transmit a lower angle of
> radiation?

There should be no significant difference in the TOA of the two antennas.
The major difference will be the folded dipole will provide more
bandwidth.

>      thanks for any answers.
> jc
> James H. "Jim" Canaday M.A.          Lynda D. Canaday, coloratura soprano
> Amateur Radio callsign: N6YR
> Lawrence,  KS
> E-mail: [e-mail]  *|* There is a telephone: [phone]
> RACES Radio Officer, Douglas Co. KS-(Radio Amateur Civil Emergency Service)
>
> -Home of-"M.C." party animal, and "Silk" the "little princess."
>               Guide Dogs for the Blind, class 512R
>                 ^our dog guides^
>                               ----------
> Yes, Bob Dole really did play basketball in Lawrence, at Kansas University,
> before he joined the military.




From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:05 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.myriad.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: folded dipole-HF-vertical?
Date: 22 Sep 1996 15:04:49 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <523kih$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <01bba76f$929705c0$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr15s5.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <01bba76f$929705c0$[e-mail]>, "Claton Cadmus" <aplite
[e-mail]> writes:
>
>
>James H. Canaday <[e-mail]> wrote in article
><[e-mail]>...
>> any one have any answers as to how  effective a vertical folded dipole
>> would be, compared to the standard quarterwave monopole-with say three
>> radials?
>>      would the vertical folded dipole tend to  transmit a lower angle of
>> radiation?
>>      thanks for any answers.
>
>All things being equal a half-wave vertical dipole, folded or not, will
>have a lower angle of radiation due to the increase height of the current
>node.  It should also have about 1.5 db gain over a quarter-wave vertical
>with a good radial system.  The disadvantage of the vertical dipole is that
>it is twice the height and some provision must be made to bring the
>feedline away at a right angle, i.e. horizontally away from the center
>(coaxial feed dipole excepted).  Often not easy to do.
>
>Claton Cadmus                  |73 de KA0GKC
>Application Technologies Inc.  |ARRL, QRP-ARCI, NorCal
>Ph.  [phone]             |ARCC, MNQRP&HB Society
>Fax  [phone]             |[e-mail]
>E-mail  [e-mail]      |ka0gkc@wb0gdb.#stp.mn.us
>

Doesn't the takeoff angle rise a bit compared to a quarter wave vertical at
ground level over salt water, for example?

//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:06 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!munnari.OZ.AU!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news.service.uci.edu!taurus.oac.uci.edu!parker
From: [e-mail] (Andrew Parker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: FS: Comet B-20 2m/440 mobile ant.
Date: 24 Sep 96 23:58:37 GMT
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: taurus.oac.uci.edu
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #7 (NOV)

Comet B-20 2m./440 mobile antenna for sale. Black. 2.15/5.0 dB Gain.
50 watt max. PL-259 connector. 30 inches in length. Sells new for about
$60. I'm asking $30 plus shipping costs. It is in good condition. Please
email any questions or offers.

--
--
Andrew Parker
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:11 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!munnari.OZ.AU!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news.service.uci.edu!taurus.oac.uci.edu!parker
From: [e-mail] (Andrew Parker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: FS: Diamond X-3200A 2m./220/440 base ant.
Date: 24 Sep 96 23:25:23 GMT
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: taurus.oac.uci.edu
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #7 (NOV)

I have a Diamond X-3200A base station antenna for sale. It handles 2m.,
220, and 440 bands. 6.0/7.8/8.0 dB gain. 100 watt capability on 2m.,
200 watts on 220 and 440. UHF connector, 4 lbs., 10 ft. It sells new
for around $220. I'm asking $120 plus shipping. It is a few years old
but in good condition. I moved into a house where I can't use it anymore.
Please email with any questions or offers.

--
--
Andrew Parker
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:12 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.magg.net!news
From: "Dale R. Parfitt" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Glass-Mount Antenna Problem
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 00:44:09 -0400
Organization: PAR Electronics
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wpb-101.magg.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win95; I)
To: Dick Hughes <[e-mail]>

Dick Hughes wrote:
>
> Having good luck with a glass-mount Larsen for 2/440 on our Jeep GC,
> and needing a (pardon the expression) CB for talking to non-ham
> friends, I elected to try another glass-mount.
>
> I bought a Valor CB antenna, which appears to be well constructed.  It
> has a variable capacitor in the inside box to set to frequency.  I
> mounted it in exactly the same relative location as the Larsen, but on
> the other side of the Jeep.  Well away from the dark banding in the
> window.
>
> When I checked it with my MFJ-259, I was able to get 1:1 SWR with 50
> ohms impedance.  It seemed to be perfect.  However, when I checked the
> SWR with both my Bird wattmeter and a conventional SWR meter, it is
> over 3:1 across the band.  I trust what the Bird is telling me.  Does
> anyone have a clue as to why this happens?  I already know a lot of
> you don't think much of glass-mount antennas, but I don't want any
> holes in the Jeep.
>
> Dick Hughes - W6CCDHi Dick,

Although I have not followed recent developments in the on-glass field I
did patent (now owned by Antenna Specialists) the 1st on-glass. This was
, and is, a 1/2 wave design thus requiring no ground plane and raising
the current loop above the mounting surface. These antennas work very
well. A top window mount compares favorably w/ a trunk mount 5/8. The
knockoff competition could not get around the patent and started using
1/4 wave designs. In many of these there is no GP and the eventual match
and take off angle are dependent upon the routing of the feed line-a s
it is "hot". A few years back I range tested all the cellular
competition (there were a dozen or so) and the A.S. design beat them all
when both gain and omni characteristics were taken into account.
Hope this helps. I am not associated w/ A.S.

73,  Dale WA2YPY


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:13 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsfeeder.gi.net!news.mid.net!news.sdsmt.edu!news.wildstar.net!newsfeed.telalink.net!telalink!uro!jackatak!root
From: [e-mail] (Jack GF Hill)
Subject: Re: Glass-Mount Antenna Problem
Organization: Jack's Amazing CockRoach Capitalist Ventures
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 13:27:52 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (System nerd)
Lines: 45

[e-mail] writes:

> My opinion is that the MFJ-259 does not generate a sufficiently high
> rf field around the glass mount to cross the gap to the antenna.
Huh?
You mean that all things being equal that power used can influence
SWR?
WOW!

How about the more likely that at 2-meters, the antenna is a very
marginal performer, and that the capacitive coupling doesn't really
work well until UHF -- I seem to recall that capacitive reactance is
*inversely* proportional to frequency, and at the lower frequencies,
there is too much *reactance* for the antenna to work well...?

> Normal antenna readings made with the analyzer
> will agree favorably with the wattmeter because most antennas are using
> a direct connection to the feedline.
And, you want to believe that indirect coupling is as good or better?
Problem here is that the thru-glass antennas are a *COMPROMISE*
designed to help people who do not want to drill a hole in the sheet metal...
NOT because the antenna is a superior design...

> The analyzer works on the reflected
> power theory - If all power is radiated or absorbed, then no power is
> returned, giving 1:1 in either case.
What other principle would you suggest? an arbitrary unit of measure
that doesn't resent a ratio of what is sent out to what is returned?

Even a Bird 43 works on the power out to power reflected principle...
and give quite accurate results.

The antenna designed to get around drilling holes is a compromise and
is inferior to a properly mounted antenna, firmly grounded to the
sheet metal...
--
73,
Jack, W4PPT/M (75M SSB 2-letter WAS #1657/#1789 -- both from the mobile! ;^)

+--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--+
| Jack GF Hill        |Voice: [phone] -             Ham Call: W4PPT |
| P. O. Box 1685      |Modem: [phone] -  Bicycling and SCUBA Diving |
| Brentwood, TN  37024|Fax:   [phone] -          Life Member - ARRL |
| [e-mail]  - "Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose" |
+--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--+


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:14 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-3.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Glass-Mount Antenna Problem
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 15:36:45 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: camoore-desk.ch.intel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

Jack GF Hill wrote:
> [e-mail] writes:
> > My opinion is that the MFJ-259 does not generate a sufficiently high
> > rf field around the glass mount to cross the gap to the antenna.
> Huh? You mean that all things being equal that power used can influence
> SWR? WOW!

Hi Jack, leads to an interesting question. What *would* happen if enough
voltage was applied to cause arcing across the gap? Would the glass melt?

73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:15 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!noos.hooked.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!usenet
From: "C. J. Hawley" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: H.F. radio setup
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 19:58:22 -0500
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <51v9ta$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: denver-5.slip.uiuc.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

derek hutter wrote:
>
> >Cost wise, you can go with RG-58.  It's pretty inexpensive and not too
> >bad for a short run.  Some people will tell you that 100 feet is too
> >long and you'll have tons of loss, but I was running 100 watts into a
> >dipole and never had problems getting out.  Remember, you don't need
> >100 terawatts on HF.
>
> RG58 is not legal to use, the National Electric Code says all antenna
> lead in wires shall be #14 or larger. If anything ever happened
> to your house say good by to your insurance.
>
> Derek KJ7HB

Is this a joke?

Chuck, KE9UW



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:16 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!newshost.convex.com!cnn.exu.ericsson.se!eua.ericsson.se!news.algonet.se!news.uoregon.edu!mars.efn.org!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Dick Hughes)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: H.F. radio setup
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1996 14:09:08 GMT
Organization: Oregon Public Networking
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <51v9ta$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dynip99.efn.org
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227

On Fri, 20 Sep 1996 19:58:22 -0500, "C. J. Hawley" <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>derek hutter wrote:
>>
>> >Cost wise, you can go with RG-58.  It's pretty inexpensive and not too
>> >bad for a short run.  Some people will tell you that 100 feet is too
>> >long and you'll have tons of loss, but I was running 100 watts into a
>> >dipole and never had problems getting out.  Remember, you don't need
>> >100 terawatts on HF.
>>
>> RG58 is not legal to use, the National Electric Code says all antenna
>> lead in wires shall be #14 or larger. If anything ever happened
>> to your house say good by to your insurance.
>>
>> Derek KJ7HB
>
>Is this a joke?
>
>Chuck, KE9UW
>

My NEC book is dated 1984, so may be out of date now, but section
810-52, which relates to amateur transmitting and receiving stations -
antenna systems, says minimum #14 for less than 150 feet.

Dick Hughes - W6CCD


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:17 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!alpha.sky.net!buffnet2.buffnet.net!news3.buffnet.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!psgrain!rainrgnews0!pacifier!usenet
From: [e-mail] (derek hutter)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: H.F. radio setup
Date: 20 Sep 1996 23:38:18 GMT
Organization: Pacifier Internet Server [phone]
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <51v9ta$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip9.van1.pacifier.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.2


>Cost wise, you can go with RG-58.  It's pretty inexpensive and not too
>bad for a short run.  Some people will tell you that 100 feet is too
>long and you'll have tons of loss, but I was running 100 watts into a
>dipole and never had problems getting out.  Remember, you don't need
>100 terawatts on HF.


RG58 is not legal to use, the National Electric Code says all antenna
lead in wires shall be #14 or larger. If anything ever happened
to your house say good by to your insurance.

Derek KJ7HB




From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:18 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!munnari.OZ.AU!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Dan Keefe)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ham-Ant Digest V96 #640
Date: 24 Sep 96 19:07:35 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, Monty says...
>
>All the while I planned my tower, I also planned to put a
>Ringo Ranger II antenna up, because I remember a Ringo my radio
>club used several years ago and its good performance and stats.
>Now my friend tells me the Ringos are bad about the screws
>coming out after some time in the wind, and suggests I get a
>Hustler instead.

I had a ringo ranger and never had the screws come
out, but corrosion was a problem.

I now have a Hy-Gain V2, which has been an excellent
antenna. I've had it since they were first introduced.
One nice feature is that it is fed in the middle, the coax
is protected there because it is inside the lower
antenna tube section.

73,
Bruce, WB4YUC

******************************************************************

Amen Bruce,

I have a Hygain V2S (2 mtrs only) that is about 15 years old and it is
about as bulletproof a product as I have ever owned.  It hears very well
and transmits with obvious gain.

I recommend you buy this HyGain product. You will not be disappointed.

Dan Keefe   KS6Z
Vista, CA



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:20 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!portal.gmu.edu!mason2.gmu.edu!cshelton
From: [e-mail] (Carroll J Shelton)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Hamstick "dipole" vs. IsoLoop
Date: 24 Sep 1996 21:41:08 GMT
Organization: George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, USA
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <529khk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mason2.gmu.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Has anyone been able to run a comparision of the AEA IsoLoop, or
the MFJ equivalent, against the routine of hooking two Hamsticks or other
mobile antennas together as a "dipole"?  I'm trying to figure
out which would be a better bet as an attic antenna on 30/20/17m.

        Jeff Shelton/KS4TL



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:21 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news1.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news3.cac.psu.edu!usenet
From: John Passaneau <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Hamstick "dipole" vs. IsoLoop
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 09:54:26 -0700
Organization: Penn State University
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <529khk$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: thing-two.phys.psu.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)

Carroll J Shelton wrote:
>
> Has anyone been able to run a comparision of the AEA IsoLoop, or
> the MFJ equivalent, against the routine of hooking two Hamsticks or other
> mobile antennas together as a "dipole"?  I'm trying to figure
> out which would be a better bet as an attic antenna on 30/20/17m.
>
>         Jeff Shelton/KS4TL

Hi Jeff:
I've never run a comparison with a hamstick dipole, but I use a hamstick
dipole on 80/40 and I use an MFJ loop on the higher frequences. Loop
antennas like the AEA or MFJ are almost as efficient as dipoles. That is
the nature of their designs. Shortened dipoles like the hamstick dipoles
are by their nature not very efficient. Only sightly better than a
mobile
whip on a car. That is largely due to lower ground losses from using two
hamsticks instead of using the car body ground. Mobile antennas
typically
are only 10% or worse. So why would anyone use a hamstick dipole? Well
the hamstick dipole is a lot cheaper. It has no moving parts. While the
2:1 SWR band width of a hamstick dipole is narrow, the loop antenna is
much narrower, this means re-tuning often with the loop. On 30m the 2:1
SWR bandwidth on my MFJ loop is about 15KHz, its much wider on 10m. With
my hamstick dipoles the 2:1 SWR bandwith on 40m is about 65KHz and would
be about the same on 30m. To move around on the bands with the hamstick
dipole I can use the internal tuner in my rig. Efficiency suffers but I
can quickly go anywere. You can't use an external tuner with a loop
antenna, you must use the antenna's tuner. With my MFJ loop it can take
2 or 3 minunits to find low SWR point and maybe longer if I can't
remember what frequency I last tuned the antenna for.
So hamstick dipoles are cheaper, faster to use and allot less efficient
than a full size dipole. Loop antenna cost allot, are slow to use, are
smaller than a hamstick dipole and are almost as efficient as a full
size dipole.

Hope this helps
John
--
  ***************************************************
  *            JOHN PASSANEAU, WB8EIY               *
  *   Penn State University, University Park, Pa.   *
  *    My opinions are my own, not my employers.    *
  ***************************************************


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:22 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Hamstick "dipole" vs. IsoLoop
Date: 27 Sep 1996 10:58:15 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 45
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <52gq27$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

>I've read Kraus's book and I agree with what your saying. But in the
>world of practical antennas there can be no doubt that a loop from MFJ
>or AEA is much more efficient than a dipole made out of hamsticks or the
>their like.

The loop would wipe out the Hamstick dipole. A pair of Hamsticks REDUCES
the efficiency when compared to a single Hamstick over a groundplane, like
a car. The second Hamstick may eliminate the car's ground resistance, but
a Hamstick has MORE loss resistance than the car. The result is less
radiation efficiency, not more, with a dipole made of lossy elements.

For the loops, remember current concentrates at the outside edge of a flat
conductor, and distributes more evenly over a round conductor. A smooth
round conductor has less resistance than a flat conductor, because much of
the surface area carries reduced current in a flat conductor. I measured
current in a five inch wide strip, and it was over ten dB down at the
center and peaked 1/4 inch in from the edges.

>A mobile whip is dependent on the Q of the loading coil. Q
>takes into account the losses in the coil form and ohmic losses in the
>wire and all the other losses. If you wanted to make a efficient
>shortened dipole you must use large diameter coil made out of large
>gauge wire. A good size to start with might be about 12" in diameter and
>made with silver plated #10 wire.

Actually coil design is so complicated it takes pages and pages and the
final product still requires testing. A small gauge coil usually has
higher Q than a large diameter tubing coil. Bigger is not only not always
better in this case, it is almost always worse. Insulation, or big
terminals or metal near the coil lowers Q. Close spacing kills Q, so does
wide spacing. The ideal spacing is around a one turn gap, and the coil
must be compact.

So the big coil wound with large diameter stainless will not only hurt Q
from resistance, it will also kill Q from stray capacitance and flux
leakage.

The optimum coil design for one system will even change with the
application! What may deliver a Q of 350 in my application may deliver a Q
of 250 in yours with the very same coil. The reason is some systems
operate the coil closer to self  resonance than others, and coil Q usually
peaks when the coil is operated at around 1/5 of it's self-resonant
frequency.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:23 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sgi.com!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!news.corp.hp.com!hpyhde2!akebono!newsmaster
From: [e-mail] (Atsushi Otsuka)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Helical wound antenna
Date: 27 Sep 1996 08:54:26 GMT
Organization: HP Japan
Lines: 19
Distribution: inet
Message-ID: <52g4o2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jcoe2657.jpn.hp.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.3J


I have seen a couple of helical wound antenna projects for HF on the
published magazines and handbooks. They usually provide information
such as winding pitch and the length of the pole. But they don't
mention the total length of the wire nor the theory behind it.

Can you enlighten me about

(1) What is the total length of the element wire wound on the pole?
(2) How do you explain the operation of the antenna? Is it the same
    as the 1/4 wavelength vertical antenna?
(3) Why do you need to wind the element? What is the advantage of
    winding the element?

Thanks,

Atsushi Otsuka
7K2COJ



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:24 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tir.com!news
From: steele <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Help - noise from motor's computer
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 23:04:16 -0400
Organization: The Internet Ramp
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: an13ph.tir.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-compaq  (Win95; I)

My husband uses a Cobra CB in his Kenworth truck. He is getting a lot of noise
when the truck is running.  It is caused by the truck's computer. This is
the ECM computer that controls the engine. It is an electronic engine.
It is not the electrical system that is causing the problem.

Does anyone know of a solution for this problem?
Any help greatly appreciated. We have asked at CB shops and even asked Kenwort
h.
No body has a fix.

Thanks in advance for your help.

Colette
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:25 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!spool.news.idt.net!news
From: "Howard A. Storchan" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Help Need 20 meter Yagi
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 18:34:53 -0700
Organization: IDT Corporation
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip134.pontiac.mi.interramp.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I; 16bit)

I am looking for someone with the plans on how to build a 20 meter yagi.
I am looking for one with 3 or 4 elements and a 20 to 30 foot boom. If
any has any suggestions or plans please e-mail me at the following.

e-mail: [e-mail]

Thank you very much!!!!

Vy 73,
  Geoff KB8UUM


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:26 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!world1.bellatlantic.net!news2.cais.net!news.cais.net!hunter.premier.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!iglou!news
From: [e-mail]
Subject: HELP WITH CHIMNEY MOUNT OF ANTENNA
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: lex-3-12.iglou.net
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services (1-800-436-4456)
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 02:35:31 GMT
Lines: 9

I'd like to mount a cushcraft r7000 on my chimney with perhps
a 3' mast above the top of the chimney (so 27' total hieght)
can anyone give me some pointers on mounting hardware,
or reference material?
thanks
john
kt4qd




From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:27 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-feed2.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.kei.com!news.texas.net!news.frontiernet.net!mulveyr
From: [e-mail] (Rich & Katy Mulvey)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HELP WITH CHIMNEY MOUNT OF ANTENNA
Date: 24 Sep 1996 23:42:18 GMT
Organization: Mulvey Home Node
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr3-216.dial.roc.frontiernet.net
X-Newsreader: slrn (0.9.0.0 (BETA) UNIX)

On Tue, 24 Sep 1996 02:35:31 GMT, [e-mail] <[e-mail]> wrote:
>I'd like to mount a cushcraft r7000 on my chimney with perhps
>a 3' mast above the top of the chimney (so 27' total hieght)
>can anyone give me some pointers on mounting hardware,
>or reference material?
>thanks


John:

   Chimney mounts are generally discouraged, because the repeated
flexing of the mast tends to cause the bricks to separate sooner than
nature intended.  I've seen this happen more than once.

   If you do want to go that way, I have seen people who have used the
Radio Shack chimney-mount hardware to good effect.  It's reasonably
stable in high winds with an R7, at least. YMMV.

- Rich




From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:28 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!in2p3.fr!swidir.switch.ch!news.rccn.net!news.ist.utl.pt!alfa.ist.utl.pt!l42303
From: Andre Brandao <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: HF YAGI Antenna
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 17:47:05 +0000
Organization: Instituto Superior Tecnico
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: alfa.ist.utl.pt
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

Hi
   I would like to know if anyone has a book or something like that which
explains how to build Yagi and Vertical antennas for HF, how do they work,
etc...
   I can pay copies and post expenses to send me it.
   For instance: is there any site on the web that explains it?


 Thank you very much, Andre Brandao, CT2GGD

        *****************************************
        *                                       *
        *  Andre Brandao                        *
        *  E-mail: [e-mail]       *
        *      or  [e-mail]  *
        *                                       *
        *****************************************



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:32 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!news.sgi.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-feed2.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: Merv Stump <[e-mail]@postoffice.worldnet.att.net>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How do i build a good dx antenna for 80M?
Date: 20 Sep 1996 19:16:34 GMT
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <51uqii$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <51k467$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 57.middletown-01.va.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22ATT (Windows; U; 16bit)

Peter, I suppose the answer to you question depends on just how serious
you want to get about 80 dxing.  In any event a good starting point is a
full wave loop.  Ideally, I would like the loop to be a perfect square,
mounted vertically, and fed in one of the bottom corners.  This will give
you a low enough angle to work into Europe or South America, and
ocasionally into the Pacific.  I would point out that if you can't put up
a perfect square, put whatever you can.  It can be a square, rectangle,
delta or whatever.  It will still work - maybe not quite as well.
Depending on your configuration and orientation the impedance will be
somewhere between 75 and 150 ohms, so a quarter wave of 70 ohm coax will
give you a very good match.

WARNING: Putting up this antenna may be hazardous to the rest of your
life.  I started this way about 15 years ago and that night worked Europe
for the first time on 80 - then I went to 2 loops, then to a vertical,
then to 2 verticals, then to a 4square vertical array.
Now, if I can just find someway to get that full-sized 3 element yagi...

Good luck, but you've been warned, Merv





From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:33 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!enews.sgi.com!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.myriad.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How do i build a good dx antenna for 80M?
Date: 21 Sep 1996 17:08:19 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <5217e3$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <51k467$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <51uqii$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup531.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <51uqii$[e-mail]>, Merv Stump <W2FOE@worldnet.
[e-mail]> writes:

>WARNING: Putting up this antenna may be hazardous to the rest of your
>life.  I started this way about 15 years ago and that night worked Europe
>for the first time on 80 - then I went to 2 loops, then to a vertical,
>then to 2 verticals, then to a 4square vertical array.
>Now, if I can just find someway to get that full-sized 3 element yagi...
>
>Good luck, but you've been warned, Merv

ROTFL my antennae off.....  :)

I've reached the 4 Square bit also....  I can tell you what Gerald Williams,
K5GW, owner of Texas Towers in Plano, TX said to me.

He's done this TWICE.  The first full sized 3EL 80 meter rotary array came
down in a windstorm.  He tells me they used a 55G tower leg bolt for
securing the end of the Philystran deadman at the tower top when they
dropped the original at 195 feet during setup.  The other one was a stronger
bolt.  He forgot to go back up the tower and replace it before the first FROPA

of autumn....

The top section has been left at about a 45 degree punched in angle sculpture
out in the field where it augered in about 20 feet deep....  It looks sort of
like that picture you sometimes see about Cadillac Ranch, where the farmer
has these rows of Cadillacs planted node first in the field all in a row,
year by year on a common slant...

:)

The second one has been up for a few years now..  Told me that when they
first got it up, they heard this wierd noise from tower top when they got back

down on the ground.  Eiryee whine.  Looked up and the thing was windmilling
a large prop-pitch rotor, B29 size.  In order to stabilize it they had to go t
o a
two-to-one gear reduction box.

The boom for it is Rohn 25G.  It and the 4 inch irrigation pipe elements top
out at some 1500 pounds.  The platform with the prop pitch and the gearbox
is just at 2000 pounds.  The tower is now a hand made super equivalent of
Rohn 65G in 20 foot sections.   I think he said 600 pounds a scetion or so.

Gerald told me that, looking at a 4 square and equivalent performance, he
didn't think he would have done this if he only new the real comparative
performance betweent the two choices.....  Given a that choice, he wouldn't
do it again either...

Your mileage may vary.

I've stop dreaming of this step...

//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:35 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.myriad.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How do i build a good dx antenna for 80M?
Date: 21 Sep 1996 17:24:24 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 72
Message-ID: <5218c8$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <51k467$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup531.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <[e-mail]>, KD1YV <[e-mail]> writes:
>Pete Soper wrote:
>> =
>
>> [e-mail] (Frank Sved) writes:
>> =
>
>> >Peter Sundstr=F6m ([e-mail]) writes:
>> >> Hello ! I would like to build a good dx antenna for 80M.
>> >> What should i try ?
>> >> // Peter
>> =
>> >No tower?  Well try what I did, a G5RV.  If you have a little space it
>> >is excellent.  Just want 80m?  Buy two rolls of 21.3m copper antenna
>> >wire from Radio Shack, centre feed it with coax (no balun).  Works
>> >good, need a tuner.
>
>> Peter is asking for a "good dx antenna for 80m". Based on 18 months of
>> heavy use, in my opinion the G5RV at the height possible in a typical
>> backyard (i.e. 50-70 feet max) makes a terrible dx antenna for 80m.
>> Great antenna for booming into ears 300-500 miles away, though, but
>> European ears can rarely detect my signal.
>> =
>
>> Regards,
>> Pete
>> KS4XG
>
>I heartily disagree.  I have been running a standard G5RV up about 45 feet.
>...
>So, Peter, as you can see, antennas are a religous topic!  Everybody has
>their own "perfect" antenna.  Go with whatever works for you.  Don't
>hesitate to try to improve whatever you have.  Remember, "it's never
>finished!"
>
>73 de Jim, KD1YV

Quite true, but one of the real reasons that the debate ranges endlessly is
that each of us has different locations.  Each of us has a different ground
profile for departure and arrival and even different profiles for different
directions of arrival.

Your location in Long Island can be quite favorable for 80 meters.  Mine is
horrible.  There isn't any signal that arrives at my location from Europe, for

example, that isn't about 20DB down from what you hear on average.  Your
initial hop to the Asian stations may well put your first reflection back upwa
rd
over a salt water, or other level ground reflection point.  Some other QTH may

not have that condition at all.  My first hop to back up is in the Rockies...

  :(

There is almost no antenna that can make up for a 20DB path advantage that
is built in for some other station, at least not in a practical sense.  What
you hear for Europe that booms in, by the time it reaches Texas, is in the
noise, all the time.  What the West Coast hears of Asia that booms in, is
in the noise all the time for us here.  The real goodies are VERY much
weaker for use in the low ground conductivity soil areas of Texas, no
matter what antenna we use.  It takes a REAL gain antenna just to overcome
the QTH disadvantage for us here, compared to what you take for granted.

I have to use a 4 square on 80 just to even compete with a single vertical or
a G5RV, maybe, for you....

That's I think, the major reason why the debate over bore size rages on..

  :)

//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:36 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.myriad.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How do i build a good dx antenna for 80M?
Date: 22 Sep 1996 15:10:42 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <523kti$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <51k467$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <5218c8$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr15s5.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <[e-mail]>, KD1YV <[e-mail]> writes:
>[e-mail] wrote:
> >> >Peter Sundstr=F6m ([e-mail]) writes:
>> >> >> Hello ! I would like to build a good dx antenna for 80M.
>> >> >> What should i try ?
>> >> >> // Peter
>> >> =
>> >> >No tower?  Well try what I did, a G5RV.  If you have a little space it
>> >I heartily disagree.  I have been running a standard G5RV up about 45 feet
.
>> >...
>> >So, Peter, as you can see, antennas are a religous topic!  Everybody has
>> >their own "perfect" antenna.  Go with whatever works for you.  Don't
>> >hesitate to try to improve whatever you have.  Remember, "it's never
>> >finished!"
>> >
>> >73 de Jim, KD1YV...
>>

>No, I'm not on Long Island, I'm in southwestern Connecticut, about 50 miles i
nland from
>Long Island, in the foothills of some group of mountains or another, about 45
0 feet ASL.
>Soil conductivity is lousy here, too.

Sorry to hear that, as are you...  :)

>Yes, but I'd bet that you get South and Central America 20 or 40 dB stronger
>than I do ;-)

If anyone ever gets on Malpelo or Serroncador Cay ever again on 80 I might be
lucky...  ;->


>If I remember correctly, Peter, the original poster of this thread, is in
>Florida, which should do just fine into Europe.  In fact, given that geograph
y,
>he could probably hit Africa and Central and South America better than either

>of us - using tin cans, soldered together to form a vertical 8-O

Retired beer cans do have a use...

Jim, KD1YV


//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:37 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news1.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.winterlan.com!frii.com!usenet
From: Avatar <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How do i shunt-feed my tower for 160 M ?
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 21:29:20 -0700
Organization: Front Range Internet, Inc.
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftc-31.ppp.frii.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; U)

The swed wrote:
>
> Hi ! here is a question about shunt-feeding......
> I got a 120 foot tower, and i would like to use the tower for 160 M.
> How do i do to shunt-feed the tower?
> 73 ┤s //Peter
> SM4PEL

Peter,

A definitive answer to your question would take many pages of text and
probably some equations and graphs. I could recommend some references in
magazines published in the USA, but you probably don't have access to
them.

In general terms you approach the shunt fed tower by looking at the
system as one-half of a folded dipole. A shunt fed tower usually does not
require the feeder stub to run the full length of the tower. Typically,
the length of the stub is about one-quarter wavelength, usually less. If
it is shorter than one-quarter wl, you will need a tuning capacitor
connected in series with the stub at the bottom to tune out the inductive
reactance produced by the short stub. That capacitor may be as much as
1000 pF.

Another aspect of the folded dipole concept is the ratio of the stub
diameter to the tower's "effective" diameter and the spacing between
them. Those dimensions will affect the impedance step-up ratio. I suggest
you start with a stub one-quarter wavelength long and prune it shorter as
needed.

It would also help to know the resonant frequency of the tower. You can
connect small coil of a few (2-4) turns between the bottom of the tower
and the ground system to couple a grid-dip meter for the test.

Be encouraged that none of the above is especially critical to getting
the system to function properly, but you should expect to do some cut and
try without the articles I mentioned above. If you can locate a copy of
the May 1975 issue of Ham Radio magazine, it will save you a lot of time.

Good luck,
Dave
W0MAY



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:38 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!portal.gmu.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-9.sprintlink.net!nntp.snet.net!news.snet.net!usenet
From: William Rahl <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: How to make GIN pole?
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 16:40:33 -0700
Organization: SNET Internet: http://www.snet.net/
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.60.14.77
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E-SNET2  (Win16; U)

I had a article ,I believe from 73 Magazine that featured
 a article on how to make a GIN POLE.(I LOST IT) Does anyone recall this.
 If some has the article would you be willing to fax me or mail
 me a copy of the article?
                                                     Thanks,
                                                     Bill Rahl



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:39 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!nntp.primenet.com!enews.sgi.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [e-mail] (MR)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: How to use a broadcast vertical ?
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 18:21:55 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <52405v$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: irv-ca13-11.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun Sep 22  1:22:55 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

I would like to know what it would take to use a AM broadcast tower
for amateur purposes? The tower is abt 200 ft tall, has about 30
radials,length is uknown. I quess the main question I have is how to
hook the radio to the tower? Would I use a ant tuner and hook it up
like a random wire? Any help would appreciated. Thanks alot de
Mike/KN6VS



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:43 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!demos!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (John R. Irvin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: HUSTLER 4-BTV ANTENNA
Date: 22 Sep 1996 20:40:04 -0700
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <5250qk$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-Posted-By: @198.68.46.190 (jrirvin)
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

I have recently bought a Hustler 4-BTV antenna.  I have installed it
according to the instructions and still can not get it to work.

I first installed the antenna on the ground without radials and it
tuned up on 10 meters and 15 meters great.  20 meters would not tune
and the VSWR was greater than 2.0 across the band.  40 meters looked
okay.??

I next install radials and 10 and 15 were still good, but 20 only
tuned a little better.  I have tried all of the suggestions given in
the installation guide (distance from metal and other materals, R.F.
coils, etc.)  and nothing worked.  I even moved it out into the yard
more trying to get it away from everything.

Today, I purchased some tubing.  I did this so I could experiment with
different section lengths.  I shortened the section under the 20 meter
trap and the VSWR started coming down to an acceptable range.  At the
same time the 10 and 15 VSWR started going up??

I would like to hear from anyone that may have had problems like I
have had and solved them.  I have not tried to dip the traps to see
what frequency they are cut for (I don't know if I can).  I plan on
calling Newtronics Antenna and talk to them, but thought I would see
if anyone has a work around or a solution to my problem.

I want to keep the antenna as low as possible so the darn thing bugs
the people around me as little as possible.  They don't think antennas
look good.  So, I would like to ground mount it.

Thanks for your help.

John Irvin, WB7DYU
[e-mail]







From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:44 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.one.net!news.one.net!news
From: Jim Leder <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HUSTLER 4-BTV ANTENNA
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 16:16:23 -0700
Organization: OneNet Communications HUB News Server
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <5250qk$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: port-17-7.access.one.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)

I agree with a problem with the 20 meter trap. I still have one and it
works OK when ground mounted. When ground mounted, the length of the
radials will not affect the tuning of the antenna. However their length
will affect its performance (and number of radials to). When mounted
above ground, the radial length of the radials becomes important to the
tuning of the antenna.


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:45 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!lou.teclink.net!usenet
From: "Tom C. Brown, Jr." <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.shortwave,vol.it.hobby.radiantismo,rec.radio.amateur.dx
Subject: Re: JPS ANC-4... Will it work?
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 12:28:01 -0500
Organization: Madison Materials Company
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <513stp$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: tc2_32.teclink.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; U)
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24270 rec.radio.shortwave:78629 rec.radio.amateur.dx:306

> Tom ...
>
>     You may be interested that Collins built one of these for
> their radios in the '30's.
>
> --
> Barry Anderson K3SUI
> Frederick, MD. 21702
> [e-mail]




Hi Barry-

Whoa!  I didn't know about that one.  I do have one Collins 75S-1 that
has the optional Collins noise blanker module that they made for it, but
the rig I spoke about is another 75S-1 that has the Waters Rejection
Tuning installed where the noise blanker goes, so there will be no
internal noise blanker in that one.  I never knew that they made
something external like that.

I sure appreciate the info!

73 and TKS again

Tom KJ5IE


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:46 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!minerva.ibernet.es!artemis.ibernet.es!news
From: "Jaime PΘrez-Ullφvarri CortΘs" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: KLM 40M-2A strength.
Date: 27 Sep 1996 16:09:31 GMT
Organization: A.R.S. EA6NB
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <01bbac85$1816dd00$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 195.76.117.108
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

I have got the newest KLM 40M-2 A, to replace my old 40CD-2 beam ( stack
with a KT34-XA) and I am concern about the strength of this antenna to the
wind as I've had heard from others . Please I will appreciate others hams
experience with this antenna before to be installed.

Thanks and 73's Jaime, EA6NB.
e-mail: [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:49 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-11.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-3.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Kurt's rectangle
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 08:51:29 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <515hhp$[e-mail]> <519omu$[e-mail]> <51djmi$[e-mail]> <51c57b$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <51m053$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: camoore-desk.ch.intel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

david l. thompson wrote:
> In any case this antenna is superior to the G5RV on 80!

Hi David, Roy, W7EL, pointed out that a similar antenna was
covered on p39 of Vol-2 of the Antenna Compendium. The title
is, "Magnetic Radiators...". The article claims that magnetic
radiators have little ground loss compared to electric radiators.
Can someone explain the difference between a magnetic radiator
and an electric radiator and why the magnetic radiator has lower
ground losses?

It appears that the vertical portion, even though it is small,
is doing most of the radiating. Does this depend on there being
equal currents in the horizontal portions? How does one feed
this antenna with ladder-line and still ensure that the currents
are balanced?

thanks and 73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:51 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!tezcat!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-8.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Kurt's rectangle
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 09:08:27 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <52a740$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: camoore-desk.ch.intel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

W8JI Tom wrote:
> I'm really taken by the fact you have never heard of snake oyl. With
> antennas, snake oyl works very well. It is becoming more and more
> common as time passes.

Hey Tom, I know you have a well equipped junk box. Could you send me
a pint of that thar snake oyl. Seems it would be worth its weight in
gold.

One more question, EZNEC shows very little horizontal radiation when
a rectangle is fed mid-point of one side even though the horizontal
portions of the antenna are twice as long as the vertical portion,
probably because the antenna radiates mostly from the high current
parts on the sides. Are ground losses less for a vertical dipole
than for horizontal dipole? The reason I ask is a lot of the horizontal
radiation goes straight down to ground while the vertical radiation
hits the ground at an angle farther away.

thanks and 73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:52 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Kurt's rectangle
Date: 24 Sep 1996 22:58:08 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 59
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <52a740$[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 David, Roy, W7EL, pointed out that a similar antenna was
>covered on p39 of Vol-2 of the Antenna Compendium. The title
>is, "Magnetic Radiators...". The article claims that magnetic
>radiators have little ground loss compared to electric radiators.
>Can someone explain the difference between a magnetic radiator
>and an electric radiator and why the magnetic radiator has lower
>ground losses?

By magic. They have found a way to create a time varying magnetic field
that is not accompanied with a changing electric field.

They do this by rubbing snake oyl on the antenna.

>the vertical section, even though small, is doing most of the radiating.

They do not rub snake oyl on the vertical section.

>Does this depend on there being
>equal currents in the horizontal portions?

They rub the oyl very deeply into the cracks and crevices of the
horizontal sections. They do this to make the magnetic, electric, and
electromagnetic fields disappear, as well as resistance in the wire
itself.

Without the snake oyl, the antenna would have a high electric field at the
middle of each horizontal span. Since the bottom wire is much closer to
earth, it would couple a large electric field into the earth. The snake
oyl stops that effect. If you crawl below the wire with two wires sticking
out from a diode connected across a meter, it will read ZERO everywhere
below the antenna with the snake oyl!

Along the horizontal conductor, you will find current flow. This current
flow does not create a magnetic field near the wire because of the snake
oyl. If you crawl along below the wire with a loopstick and a small coil
of wire exciting a diode that drives a meter, you will find no field at
all. Once again, the snake oyl does it's job. Without this oyl, you would
have to be many wavelengths away to observe the same effect.

>How does one feed
>this antenna with ladder-line and still ensure that the currents
>are balanced?

Silly boy! Rub snake oyl on the feeder. Then the resistive loss of the
feeder, plus the radiation and induction field losses all become zero,
even if the feedline is within a fraction of the wire spacing of other
objects or unbalanced. If the oyl works on the antenna, it'll work on the
feeder.

I'm really taken by the fact you have never heard of snake oyl. It must be
because you work with computors. If you rub snake oyl on a program, the
output makes no sense. With antennas, snake oyl works very well. It is
becoming more and more common as time passes.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:53 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!scnews.sc.intel.com!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Kurt's rectangle
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 10:31:36 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <52c1g2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.137.166
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

W8JI Tom wrote:
> I suspect NEC will have a time with this loss because your backyard will
>be a lot different than the perfectly distributed model of soil it uses.

Does that imply that my backyard isn't perfect?

> If it were me, I'd avoid trying to use two co-phased short verticals...
> especially when the high voltage point and loading section was a few feet
> above lossy earth.

Something I don't understand is why salt water and conductive earth are
less lossy than semi-conductive earth yet non-conductive space is lossless.
With 10 inches of rain a year, my backyard is relatively non-conductive.

I'm guessing a vertical delta loop with a horizontal side at the top would
be less lossy than a vertical rectangle. I just modeled one for 40m. EZNEC
sez 3.4dBi gain at 17deg TOA with a beamwidth of 2x129deg = 258deg

One can use a current balun to balance the currents from coax to dipole.
How does one force a current balance in ladder-line feeding an asymetrical
antenna? Is there such a thing as a current balbal?

thanks and 73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:54 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Kurt's rectangle
Date: 27 Sep 1996 14:45:11 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 28
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <52h7bn$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

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

>
>   So I would maintain that the currents in the horizontal parts of the
>full wave loop fed in the middle of the vertical side, are more or less
>equal in magnitude and 180 degrees out of phase.  Thus in the far field,
>they more or less cancel.  Of course the fact that the bottom of the loop
>is much closer to ground will tend to unbalance the currents in practice,
>and introduce some horizontal radiation.

Good analysis, but don't forget it is also a geometry problem as well as
the "current and voltage unbalance probelm.

If one wire is much closer to earth it is more than just the current
unbalance that causes coupling. In order to be in the null, the wires
would have to impose equal and opposite field effects on the lossy dirt,
and that only occurs when thee path lengths are substantially the same.

The wires don't do that, even for the electric field, unless they are a
few to several wire spacings above earth unless ......

you rub the wires with snake oyl (there I go again)

By the way, if it was really a magnetic radiator why wouldn't it follow
the law of d^3 for magnetic fields?

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:55 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!Norway.EU.net!nntp.uio.no!news.cais.net!ari.ari.net!gate.va.net!jhuggins
From: "John S. Huggins" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Lightning Damage
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 07:04:27 -0400
Organization: ARInternet, Corp.
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: gate.va.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>

I am preparing tips on lightning issues on a web page at:

http://www.va.net/chesapeake_research/lightning

It is still new, but will improve as time moves on.  Check back once in a
while.

Thanks for your response.
John

On Tue, 17 Sep 1996, Christoph Nadig wrote:

> hi John,
>
> Not yet. But I'm setting up my antenna in about 2 weeks, living in a region
> where lightnings occur extraordery often and I'm thus eager to know how to
> prevent damage.
>
> Cheers, Chris
>
> --
> --
> [e-mail]
>



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:56 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!tezcat!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!qualcomm.com!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Robert Wanderer)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Lightning Protection Spoke Here
Date: 24 Sep 96 02:03:35 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

For information on this subject, check out PolyPhaser Corporation's
web site at www.polyphaser.com

To get questions answered, contact [e-mail]  Include a work
or home telephone number for quickest followup.

73, Bob AA0CY
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:57 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Steven Olson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: long wire
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 22:05:41 -0500
Organization: Dell Computer Corporation
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: chw-il5-55.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Tue Sep 24 10:06:45 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v1.01

Am moving to a new location and thinking of trying a long wire antenna
for hf.  Anyone with specs and tips would be appreciated.  Steve. WO9L
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:58 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [e-mail](Perry Lundquist )
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Looking For 10db Attenuator for 2m/70cm
Date: 24 Sep 1996 05:34:18 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <527rsq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: den-co10-07.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Tue Sep 24 12:34:18 AM CDT 1996

I'm looking for a 10db attenuator useable with a dual band HT for 2m
and 70cm. I live in intermod hell and am searching for some relief. A
notch or band pass filter won't work because I would loose the use of
one band. In a recent QST article about intermod a mention was made
that because most of the time the unwanted signal is a third harmonic,
a 10 db attenuation of the wanted freq. will reduce the unwanted freq.
by 30 db. My thinking was that such a 10db attenuator coupled with a RF
actuated relay would be a possible solution. The RF relay would insure
that the circuit is inline only during receive. Any circuit suggestions
would be very much appreciated.

Thanks,

Perry - KB0WAJ


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:59 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.sgi.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!news.whidbey.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (David M Schertzer)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,whidbey.forsale
Subject: Low Band Antenna (30-50mhz)
Date: 25 Sep 1996 03:09:10 GMT
Organization: DND
Lines: 13
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <52a7om$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: asn145.whidbey.net
X-Newsreader: News for Windows NT X1.0-92

*** NEW*** NEW***NEW*****
Antenna Specialist - ASPS593
Hi-Power, Cowl (fender) mount Disguise Antenna
30-50 mhz (low band)
Looks like a normal AM/FM car antenna
Original packaging + box
$50.00 shipped via UPS (CONUS) or
trade for anything you may have?

Oak Harbor, WA   USA
Ham Radio - VE7-LFA/W7
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:53:59 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.datalytics.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-8.sprintlink.net!nntp.snet.net!news.snet.net!NewsWatcher!user
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: MFJ-1798 10 Bander / Experiences? Opinions?
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 22:56:06 -0400
Organization: SNET Internet: http://www.snet.net/
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <spiro-2009962256070001@204.60.8.42>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.60.8.42

I'm also considering in the MFJ-1798 or the Cushcraft R-7000 - But the
feedback that I'm getting is MFJ is putting too many bands on a 20 foot
ant...

More opinions please!!!



In article <[e-mail]>, "Mark L. Bary" <[e-mail]> wrote:

> A friend of mine is considering the purchase of the 10 Band MFJ antenna
> above for use on the HF bands mostly.
>
> Anyone out there had any experience with this antenna yet?  Please write
> and tell us your opinion and any  experiences you've had with it.
>
> Thanks very much,
>
> 73,
>
> Mark
> N4EOC


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:01 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!enews.sgi.com!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Midwest Mobile Shootout
Date: 19 Sep 1996 21:16:51 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 45
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <51sra3$[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:

>That's about it.
>Some other things were tried including a coil wound with litz wire which
>resulted in a reading of about 75% of what his solid wire (of the same
>diameter of wire as the litz) coil acheived (I coulda told him that but
>I feel better about SAYING THAT after I saw the results).

I know Litz wire does not work well at all outside of low VLF, and I'm not
so sure it's even better there. I've measured it here in coils for
broadcast and HF..

>Also,a triangular mast (point up and next to the coil) fed in the center
>of the base (not any better than the single one inch mast).

Makes perfect sense. A thin uniform mast should actually be better.

>Coils that are longer than they are wide are better than the high Q
>(twice as wide as long) profile (still searching for the optimum length
>to width ratio...somewhere between a center loading square coil and a
>helical wound antenna...the coil isn't a lumped element here...it's part
>of the radiator....what's best?).

The optimum ratio of L to D (form factor) varies with wire gauge and the
exact application. It ranges from .5 to 1 to 2:1, the only real consistant
thing is in almost every case optimum spacing between turns is a one turn
gap. Q is limited by wire size also, too large a wire can be as bad as too
small.

The only way I've been sucessful at guessing Q is to actually measure
several coils after the proper reactance is determined.

>Capacity hats do better, but not that much better if the coil is
>reasonably low loss (wire size and spacing, etc.).

They should make a large difference if the hat is properly placed. I
suspect most people just "stick" a hat on someplace, when the only place
it should be used is very near the top.

I'd sure like to see a "shootout" at the Dayton Hamfest or someplace in
the east central USA, maybe Nashville or that town in Kentucky where they
make Corvettes.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:01 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-11.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-3.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Midwest Mobile Shootout
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 08:37:46 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: camoore-desk.ch.intel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

C. J. Hawley wrote:
> The mobiles were restricted to 100 watts (measured with a Bird meter)

Hi Chuck, Is the 100 watt limit forward power or (forward power minus
reflected power)? If just forward power, it is not a valid test.
If the forward power is 100w and the reflected power is 25w, then
the transmitter is only generating 75w.

73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:05 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!usenet
From: "C. J. Hawley" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Midwest Mobile Shootout
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 12:33:30 -0500
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edmonton-13.slip.uiuc.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Cecil Moore wrote:
>
> C. J. Hawley wrote:
> > The mobiles were restricted to 100 watts (measured with a Bird meter)
>
> Hi Chuck, Is the 100 watt limit forward power or (forward power minus
> reflected power)? If just forward power, it is not a valid test.
> If the forward power is 100w and the reflected power is 25w, then
> the transmitter is only generating 75w.
>
> 73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)

Well that's the rub. It was left up to the participant to tune and match
the antenna as far as the competition is concerned. The power was
measured for the highest reading participants to insure that the high
reading was not due to more than 100 watts. The reflected power was
adjusted to zero for this measurement. The trouble with this is that it
was entirely possible (in retrospect and after I thought about your
question) to misunderstand the low readings reported by some of the
other mobile systems because they most certainly could have been
mismatched. However, I doubt that anyone was off by an SWR of 3 to 1. I
must say that I am only interested in what works and why. Others are
almost only interested in who is the winner (they deny this but it is
pretty obvious if you're there). These shootouts started out without
rules but we are getting more organized. I think it's clear that if you
want to learn anything, you have to measure and perfectly match each
antenna system or know why you can't. I will propose this for the next
shootout.

Thanks for the feedback.

Chuck, KE9UW



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:06 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.inc.net!newspump.sol.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!enews.sgi.com!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!news
From: [e-mail] (W6KKT Jesse)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Midwest Mobile Shootout
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 02:14:05 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 34
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <52e2k4$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dyn25.frazmtn.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/16.227

On 26 Sep 1996 14:05:56 GMT, Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>"C. J. Hawley" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>I think it's clear that if you
>>want to learn anything, you have to measure and perfectly match each
>>antenna system or know why you can't.
>
>Hi Chuck, not taking reflected power into account could put hams
>with antenna tuners inside the car at a disadvantage they do not
>deserve. For someone with 150w forward and 50w reflected, the
>transmitter is only generating 100w so total power should always
>be forward power minus reflected power. W6KKT does that at the
>CA mobile antenna shootout.
>
>73, Cecil, W6RCA
>
>
Hi Cecil,  It seems funny now, but I wish you could have been out here
to experience the negative reaction  by many supposedly knowledgeable
engineers when I subtracted the reflected from the forward power to
obtain the  true power accepted by the antenna system.  For a time I
thought I was going to be "tarred and feathered".  Kurt (He, who walks
on water) devoted  columns as to why I shouldn't use the reflected
component.  In one of my telephone conversations with Walter Maxwell
(concerning impedance measureing technique of baluns)  I mentioned
the problem I was having from my "peers" concerning the way I was
calculating  power to the load (antenna).  He said, "If you want
accuracy you have to subtract the reflected from the forward to
accurately know what the antenna system is accepting".
It will be interesting to see if you get any "heat" from  your thread.
I will bring my test equipment to Arizona for a "mobile shootout" if
you will set it up....???
Respectfully, Jesse, W6KKT


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:07 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!athos.itribe.net!global.gc.net!sourcebbs!bob.roach
From: [e-mail] (BOB ROACH)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: RE:Need 2m/70cm CAVITY IN
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 96 15:24:00 -0500
Distribution: world
Organization: SelectiveSourceBBS VirginiaBeach  [phone]
Reply-To: [e-mail] (BOB ROACH)
References: <[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: PCBoard Version 15.3
X-Mailer: PCBoard/UUOUT Version 1.30
Lines: 16

  >-I'm looking for pictures or plans to build a 2m and a 70cm CAVITY for usin
g
  >-ONE 2M (70cm) Antenna
  >-With a phone repeater ... I've heard about one 2m plans in QST 1979 ...
  >-Could you help me ?

Hello Yann,

I have a copy of an article in the December 1973 issue of Ham Radio
magazine which tells how to manufacture a pair of 2M cavities from
standard copper plumbing parts. If you would like a copy please send me
your mailing address and I will put a copy in the mail to you.
73
Bob


 * SLMR 2.1a * [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:08 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!Norway.EU.net!nntp.uio.no!nntp.uib.no!nntp-bergen.UNINETT.no!nntp-trd.UNINETT.no!troll.powertech.no!usenet
From: Karl Martin Gjestrum <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Need a good multiband antenna
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 17:58:34 +0200
Organization: Kalles Surfeklubb DELUXE
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: slave.applause.no
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I)
Cache-Post-Path: slave.applause.no!ra-ppp2.applause.no

Currently I have a 2x20m double zepp antenna feeded with 23m 450 ohm
ladder line. It seems to work ok from 160m-6m.
The only problem is that I am getting tired of all the tuning
every time I shift band.

So I was hoping anyone new of any antennas with performance like my
double zepp antenna. BUT WITH A GOOD SWR ON MOST OF THE BANDS FROM
160 -10m.

Do you know of any antennas that would beat my double zepp and still
have good SWR ? Please give me a idea of what antenna I should put up
before the winter.

Two antennas I have heard about is the Carolina Windom, and a Double
windom with 4 legs covering 160-10m with SWR less than 1.6 :1

I have also heard about a double G5RV antenna covering 160-10m.

Does you have any information on the abowe antennas and how they
work ?

73 de LA7EJA


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:09 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news1.radix.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Chuck Spafford)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need a good multiband antenna
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1996 05:37:52 GMT
Organization: Cen-Trex Computer Services
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialin18.annex4.radix.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/16.227

On Fri, 20 Sep 1996 17:58:34 +0200 Karl Martin Gjestrum wrote in
rec.radio.amateur.antenna:

>I have also heard about a double G5RV antenna covering 160-10m.

I use a modified G5RV made by N3IK (look in the callbook).  I paid
about $30.00 and it works beautifully on all bands.  160 has a higher
SWR (around 1.5:1), but the other bands load around 1.1:1.  It's with
a manual tuner, but it tunes quite quickly.  I've used it for DXing
and in 2 contests and really haven't had a problem with tuning
quickly.



73, de Chuck Spafford
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:09 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!n1van.istar!van-bc!unixg.ubc.ca!aurora.cs.athabascau.ca!news.mag-net.com!freenet.unbc.edu!news.scn.org!scn.org!bd703
From: [e-mail] (SCN User)
Subject: Non-guyed vent pipe mounting.
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail] (SCN User)
Organization: Seattle Community Network
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 01:11:57 GMT
Lines: 16


What is the maximum safe length of 1-1/4 mast that can be used to support
a Hustler G6-144A vertical 2m ant that is mounted to a roof vent pipe
and CANNOT be guyed?

Presently I have about 3ft of mast and would like to get it a little bit
higher, but the property owner won't allow guy anchors in/on the structure.

Kerwin
N7JGW

--
*****************************************************************************
                                     *    They know who you are...
         [e-mail]               *     They know where you live...
                                     *      And there's no doubt about it!


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:10 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!van-bc!news.rmii.com!rainbow.rmi.net!rainbow!jonz
From: [e-mail] (Bea and Marvin Jones)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Non-guyed vent pipe mounting.
Date: 27 Sep 1996 14:49:08 GMT
Organization: Rocky Mountain Internet - (800) 900-RMII
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <52gph4$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rainbow.rmii.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

SCN User ([e-mail]) wrote:

: What is the maximum safe length of 1-1/4 mast that can be used to support
: a Hustler G6-144A vertical 2m ant that is mounted to a roof vent pipe
: and CANNOT be guyed?

: Presently I have about 3ft of mast and would like to get it a little bit
: higher, but the property owner won't allow guy anchors in/on the structure.

The thought of attaching a tall mast on a vent pipe is disturbing.
It involves the pipe material: plastic, metal , and, maybe more
importantly, how the pipe is mounted/clamped within the walls and
roof structure.

But, I had a thought just now:  Design a system where you slip a
long section of the mast _inside_ the vent pipe.  Select the
proper mast diameter and drill lots of widely spaced holes
_above_ the top lip of the vent pipe for the venting action
-- it just might do the 'trick'.  You should be able to drop
down into the vent pipe about 6' before you'd ever encounter
waste water flow entering the pipe.

It just _seems_ like this would be a whoooooole lot sturdier.

Heads up -- YMMV.

Regards,

73
Jonesy  W3DHJ
__
SK


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:11 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: OK so it's not captu
Date: 22 Sep 1996 13:34:37 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 13
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <523tbd$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (FORREST GEHRKE) writes:

>
>If that reduces the I^2*R losses by half, perhaps? ;-)
>//
>  k2bt

Thjat's a good point Forrest. If it reduces the loss by half it does!

Good one.

Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:12 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!tandem!pacbell.com!usenet
From: Steve Hawkins <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: On the glass antenna
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 06:29:56 -0700
Organization: Pacific Bell
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sjhawk2.bsrn2420.pacbell.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; U)

I have just about given up trying to find a way to get behind the
headliner in my 96 Toyota Tacoma and am considering an "on the glass"
antenna for 2m.  Does anybody have any recomendations?  Please E-mail
responces to [e-mail]

Thanks Steve WV6U


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:13 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.kei.com!news.thenet.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!spool.news.idt.net!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Open-wire Windom
Date: 23 Sep 1996 11:52:12 GMT
Organization: IDT Corporation
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <525tlc$[e-mail]>
References: <5251p2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hingham4.pcix.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

>   [e-mail] (Jim Martin, WK1V) writes:
>  [e-mail] (Steve Bertsch) wrote:
>
>  >Many plans for, and commercial versions of the windom put a 4:1 balun righ
t
>  >at the (1/3) feed point, and then drop coax down to the shack. Has anyone
>  >fed one of these with ladder line down to ground level, and put the 4:1
>  >matching balun/whatever there?
>
>  >I know I'll get feedline radiation this way, but seeing as how I *hate*
>  >climbing up high things, this ways I could fiddle with matching schemes
>  >all I wanted, without the "high anxiety."
>
>  >Any "been there, done that" folks out there?
>
>  I may be naive but I always believed the "True" Windom was a single
>  "T" wire.  The vertical element went up to and was connected at about
>  the 2/3rds point of one side of the horizontal section.  Anything else
>  is an off center fed dipole.  Someone correct me if I am incorrect.
>
>  Some OCFD designs don't use a matching balun at all, some use a 6:1,
>  and others use a 4:1.
>
>  I've never tried one with ladder line.  I am currently using a G5RV
>  design with 450 ohm ladder line to a 4:1 balun and then about 45' of
>  unbalanced line to the shack.  It is not related to the windom but
>  when I first put it up I did have 70' on one side and 51' on the
>  other.  Then I moved it and I cut the other side to 51'.  It did work
>  well on all bands in its former state.
>
>  I used an MFJ-259 analyzer when I built the OCFD version, so didn't
>  really put it down on paper first.  Just began cutting to get it
>  resonant in the cw portion of 80 meters...it worked elsewhere with a
>  transmatch...and since I don't run power I didn't worry about it.
>
>  My opinion is, if it works....use it.
>  ===========================================
>  cheers! Jim Martin, wk1v
>  Lowell, Mass, U.S.A.
>  http://www.shore.net/~jjmartin/jjm.htm
>
>
>>>>
Have used the off center feed with open wire or ladder line and you will like
the
way you can control it with a balun or tuner at ground level.
Better to tune out reactance then balun if necessary and tune further with T o
r L network.
This is verrryyy versatile...

73 de [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:14 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!sbertsch
From: [e-mail] (Steve Bertsch)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Open-wire Windom
Date: 23 Sep 1996 17:41:52 GMT
Organization: University Technology Services
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <526i50$[e-mail]>
References: <51s2t6$[e-mail]> <5251p2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: x1.us.ohio-state.edu

In article <5251p2$[e-mail]>, Jim Martin, WK1V <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I previously wrote:
>
>>Many plans for, and commercial versions of the windom put a 4:1 balun right
>>at the (1/3) feed point, and then drop coax down to the shack. Has anyone

>I may be naive but I always believed the "True" Windom was a single
>"T" wire.  The vertical element went up to and was connected at about
>the 2/3rds point of one side of the horizontal section.  Anything else
>is an off center fed dipole.  Someone correct me if I am incorrect.

You're correct, Jim. OCF dipole is what I meant. My language is getting
sloppy from reading too many ads in ham magazines. (Carolina windom?)

- Steve



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:16 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.mindspring.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.one.net!news.one.net!news
From: Rich Griffiths <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Quadrifilar Helix
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1996 11:21:19 -0400
Organization: OneNet Communications HUB News Server
Lines: 84
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <51pu5i$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port-3-12.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)

Sorry I missed the beginning of this thread (due to lots of business travel).
I'd like to offer a few comments.

Bob Bruhns wrote:
>
> [e-mail] wrote (re quadrifilar helix antennas:
> : ... I plan to build two more
> :   1. Four QF's mounted in a square, phased, for extra gain.
> :   2. A QF 4 wavelengths long instead of 1, also for more gain, by
> :      extending the boom length.(QuadraQuadrafilar)
> : How would a QF work with a relector dish?
> : TS
>
>   TS, that first idea holds some promise if you are going to make a
> variably-phased array of QFHs.

How would you do this?  It's not obvious to me what "phased" would mean
for an array of QFH antennas.  If you do make such an array, I'd love to
see the results of some careful measurements that compare the array and
a single QFH.

> The problem with the second idea is
> that you will lose the uniform hemispherical coverage, and therefore
> you will have to point the antenna with an az-el mount.  If you're
> going to do this, you might as well use a regular helix, or crossed
> yagis, etc.

I think I agree.

>   The whole point of the QFH, as I understand it, is that it provides
> circular polarization over a rather uniform hemisperical pattern, with
> a small and simple antenna.  This allows you to transmit to / receive
> from a tumbling, non-stationary satellite without having to reposition
> your antenna, and without polarization fading.  However, it necessarily
> means low antenna gain.

I think the whole point is that the satellites (many of which use QFH
antennas) are transmitting circularly polarized signals.  An improperly
polarized receiving antenna suffers a loss (theoretical) from 3dB to 20dB.

Amateur use of QFH antennas for satellites that are not transmitting
circularly polarized signals is new (to me, anyway).  I've read somewhere
(Taggart?) that it takes both RHCP and LHCP antennas and an antenna switch
to get good coverage through a complete pass.

>   Clever QFH designs sacrifice some high-angle gain for some extra
> sensitivity at lower angles, to compensate for the higher path loss
> at lower look angles.  But if you go beyond these "equal-signal"
> patterns, you will wind up with an antenna that only performs well
> for horizontal look angles, or a beamed pattern that you have to
> continually point at the satellite as it passes across the sky.
>
>   Wide angle coverage necessarily means low gain.  As soon as you
> stack or redesign QFHs for gain, you will narrow the directional
> pattern.  Of course, in the case of the adjustably phased array,
> this is OK; you would dynamically vary the phasings to direct the
> beam towards the moving target.  But in the case of a fixed-pattern
> long-boom QFH, you might as well use a helix, or crossed yagis, etc.

I think Kilgore (Mr. Quadrifilar Helix) worked out the principles of QFH
length and diameter vs. pattern.  I don't have the reference handy,
unfortunately.

>   The reflector idea has the same problem.  I think the QFH gets its
> half-spherical pattern because of reflection from the surface below.
> But if you try to go beyond this for more sensitivity, you will at
> best narrow the beam, and then you're back to physical repositioning
> for maximum signal, and the regular helix or crossed yagi designs
> already offer good, proven gain configurations.  Of course, you may
> stumble upon a good unidirectional gain design based on QFH
> techniques, if that's what you want to do.

I believe the QFH gets its hemispherical pattern from its shape and
feedpoint location, rather than from reflections from below.  This would
mean that one must be used "upside down" if it were to be the feed for
a dish.  That is, the "up" direction of the antenna would have to be
pointing into the dish.

For vhf and low uhf, it will take a pretty big dish.  At higher frequencies,
I think there are better ways to make a circularly polarized feed.



Rich Griffiths    W2RG


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:17 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.one.net!news.one.net!news
From: Rich Griffiths <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Quadrifilar Helix
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 10:24:41 -0400
Organization: OneNet Communications HUB News Server
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <51pu5i$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <522ae9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port-4-18.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)

Bob Bruhns wrote:
>
> Regarding a variably phased array of QFHs, Rich Griffiths ([e-mail])
> wrote:
> : How would you do this?  It's not obvious to me what "phased" would mean
> : for an array of QFH antennas.  If you do make such an array, I'd love to
> : see the results of some careful measurements that compare the array and
> : a single QFH.
>

<snip>

>   It is possible to optimize an array for any desired azimuth /
> elevation and direct the beam as desired by arranging controllable
> variable delays to each QFH in the array.  Of course, AM broadcast
> band stations use vertical antennas, not QFHs; their directional
> patterns are meant to be along the horizontal plane.  The vertical
> antenna null at high radiation angles would compromise the performance
> of an array of verticals if the desired beam were to be far above the
> horizon.  But with an array of QFH antennas, this problem is
> eliminated.

I'm familiar with the principles of phasing and interference.  But here,
the devil is in the details.  One of the finer features of the QFH is that
it should retain true circular polarization throughout the hemisphere into
which it is radiating.  I wonder if this would be true with an array of
QFHs.  Or would the polarization degenerate to elliptical off the axis and
approach linear polarization at some point?  If the pattern becomes too
weird, the antenna offers no advantages over crossed yagis and is more
complicated.

However, I don't want to discourage anyone who is willing to experiment.
I just want to urge him to measure carefully, as he will be doing something
quite unusual.  And *please* post the results; I'd love to see them.

>  By the way, I have also read about circular polarization reversing
> sense as a satellite passes zenith.  I don't work satellites, but I
> think this is not the case with QFHs.

It's not the case with the polar-orbiting weather satellites.  They are
pretty much rock-solid from AOS to LOS with an RHCP QFH antenna.

> I could be wrong, though.  And
> I always thought the early satellites (some of them at least) had
> simpler antennas that produced polarization fading as the satellite
> orbited.  Could be wrong about that too.

Some (still) use linear polarization.  Satellite tumbling and poor look
angles can be real problems.



Rich Griffiths    W2RG


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:18 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!alpha.sky.net!newshub.csu.net!csulb.edu!news.sgi.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!li.net!bbruhns
From: [e-mail] (Bob Bruhns)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Quadrifilar Helix
Date: 23 Sep 1996 18:59:48 GMT
Organization: LI Net (Long Island Network)
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <526mn4$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <51pu5i$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <522ae9$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: linet01.li.net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Rich Griffiths ([e-mail]) wrote:
: I'm familiar with the principles of phasing and interference.  But
: here, the devil is in the details.  One of the finer features of the
: QFH is that it should retain true circular polarization throughout
: the hemisphere into which it is radiating.  I wonder if this would
: be true with an array of QFHs.  Or would the polarization degenerate
: to elliptical off the axis and approach linear polarization at some
: point?  If the pattern becomes too weird, the antenna offers no
: advantages over crossed yagis and is more complicated.

  Good point, Rich.  I'll have to think about that.  And thanks for
the info on the polar-orbit weathersats and the tumbling issue.
I frequently need a sanity check!

  Bob Bruhns, WA3WDR, [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:19 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news-in.iadfw.net!dal12-27.ppp.iadfw.net!user
From: [e-mail] (cleve e massey)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Quasi-homebrew 6 mtr. GP
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 00:18:32 -0500
Organization: INTERNET AMERICA
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dal12-27.ppp.iadfw.net

I have a Larsen 6 mtr. mobile antenna that is now going unused as I put a
PERTH JR. PLUS on my car and it works great on 6 and HF!!!

I was thinking of taking the Larsen and making it the heart of a 6
groundplane for the FM part of the band...

Two questions I need help with...

What length should the radials be???

Should they be bent at a 45 degree angle or straight...

Larsen makes a kit that makes a groundplane out of the high band and UHF
antennas but not the low band stuff..

Any help would be greatly appreciated...

pse e-mail direct...

tnx...cleve/wd5bor


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:20 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!nntp.primenet.com!news.sgi.com!enews.sgi.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.eden.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: R5 Questions - Help
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 20:49:40 GMT
Organization: Adhesive Media, Inc.
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <5248sb$[e-mail]>
References: <01bba32e$fe9c4d60$0f02000a@Digex>
NNTP-Posting-Host: net-8-050.austin.eden.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

"David Hubbard" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Thanks for reading.  After years of living in a townhouse where
>I was stuck with attic dipoles, I've finally moved to a house where
>I'll at least have room to install a vertical.  I've been looking at
>the R5 and have some questions:

>1) The antenna is advertised as requiring no ground radial system.
>    When installed without radials, is there a minimum height above
>    ground which the antenna must be installed?
>2)  Would you recommend a ground or rooftop installation?


David,

If the R5 is like the R7 (and I suspect it is) the installation
instructions specify that the measurements (VSWR etc.) are referenced
to an installation at 8' above ground without any nearby objects.  I
assume this means that the antenna will work at this altitude.  My R7
is mounted on a chimney on top of an 8' mast for a total height of
23'.  It works fine.  I've used on during Field Day at about 10' and
couldn't tell much difference from mine.  Hope this helps.

John KK5MH




From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:21 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!spool.mu.edu!newspump.sol.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!news.rl.af.mil!rl.af.mil!robinsona
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: R5 Questions - Help
Date: 24 Sep 1996 18:22:09 GMT
Organization: USAF Rome Laboratory
Lines: 22
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <5298sh$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ce7.ce.rl.af.mil

In message <5250sa$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jim Martin, WK1V) writes
:

>[e-mail] () wrote:
>
>>********* I installed an R5 in May of this year and to my knowledge there is

no
>>recommended minimum height.
>
>The Cushcraft recommended minimum height is 8' above and away from
>anything metallic.  But whatever works is fine.
>

9/24/96:

Jim:  I checked the Cushcraft manual and you're right on the 8 ft.
recommendation.  My previous comment was based on a conversation I had with a
Cushcraft factory rep at the Dayton Hamfest.  I asked him what was magical
about the 8 ft. and he indicated that if a height wasn't published, Cushcraft
would get calls asking what it should be.

73   Al,   W2JUV



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:22 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx02-16
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: rain static on dipole
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 96 15:19:40 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <528u4g$[e-mail]>
References: <527bgl$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx02-16.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <527bgl$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Duane B. Smith) wrote:
>What causes "rain static" on a dipole?? I have a 160 meter horizontal
>dipole at 70ft height fed with 450 ohm ladder line. Every time it rains
>I get s9 "rain static" in my receiver. The antenna has been up for about
>a year and a half. When it's not raining the noise is gone except for
>normal band noise. Is there any way to prevent this?? I don't recall
>having this problem when the antenna was new. BTW the antenna is 12ga
>stranded copper insulated "thhn" electric wire. The antenna is not near
>any power lines and everything is grounded right outside the shack <
>10ft away.
>
>Any thoughts from the antenna guru's would be appreciated.
>
>                        Thanks, Duane
>

Have you verified that the noise is being generated by the antenna by listenin
g
with another antenna or sniffing around with an AM radio? It sounds like the
problem might be an electical device with leakage aggravated by the rain.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:22 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news00.sunet.se!sunic!mn6.swip.net!mn5.swip.net!news
From: Maude Schyffert <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: rain static on dipole
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 09:42:07 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <527bgl$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup122-1-10.swipnet.se
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-User: s-12444
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b6Gold (Win16; I)
To: "Duane B. Smith" <[e-mail]>

Duane B. Smith wrote:
>
> What causes "rain static" on a dipole?? I have a 160 meter horizontal
> dipole at 70ft height fed with 450 ohm ladder line. Every time it rains
> I get s9 "rain static" in my receiver. The antenna has been up for about
> a year and a half. When it's not raining the noise is gone except for
> normal band noise. Is there any way to prevent this?? I don't recall
> having this problem when the antenna was new. BTW the antenna is 12ga
> stranded copper insulated "thhn" electric wire. The antenna is not near
> any power lines and everything is grounded right outside the shack <
> 10ft away.
>
> Any thoughts from the antenna guru's would be appreciated.
>
>                         Thanks, Duane
>
> --
> Duane B. Smith [e-mail]
> 09/23/96 17:57
> KI7UF, Arlington, WA
> or [e-mail]

Sorry Old Chap,

it's there and has been since Marconi, a good noise blanke can prevent
part of it.

SM0BKZ


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:24 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.winterlan.com!frii.com!usenet
From: Avatar <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: rain static on dipole
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 18:01:18 -0700
Organization: Front Range Internet, Inc.
Lines: 74
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <527bgl$[e-mail]> <527o40$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftc-51.ppp.frii.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; U)

W8JI Tom wrote:
>
> In article <527bgl$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Duane B.
> Smith) writes:
>
> >
> >What causes "rain static" on a dipole?? I have a 160 meter horizontal
> >dipole at 70ft height fed with 450 ohm ladder line. Every time it rains
> >I get s9 "rain static" in my receiver. The antenna has been up for about
> >a year and a half. When it's not raining the noise is gone except for
> >normal band noise. Is there any way to prevent this?? I don't recall
> >having this problem when the antenna was new. BTW the antenna is 12ga
> >stranded copper insulated "thhn" electric wire. The antenna is not near
> >any power lines and everything is grounded right outside the shack <
> >10ft away.
>
> Hi Duane,
>
> First you have to be sure it's rain static, and not a hardware problem on
> a power line.
> If your receiver, on AM, makes a buzzing noise it's certainly power line
> type noise. If it's a hiss, it could be either. Very high voltage three
> phase lines sometimes make more of a hiss than a buzz, and it may be hard
> to tell them from "rain static".
>
> If it is indeed rain static, I believe it is usually from corona discharge
> from sharp points or thin wire ends in the antenna. Using insulated wire,
> thick conductors, and avoiding sharp points on the antenna will help
> reduce the noise, since all of these things reduce corona discharge. The
> corna comes from the large potential difference between the grounded
> antenna and the moist air around the antenna during the storm.
>
> On my high beam antennas and dipoles, I hear the noise during heavy rain.
> It builds to a loud roar. Then once in a while....  POP, a bolt of
> lightning flashes and the noise dies and starts to build back up.
>
> Some people claim the noise is from charged drops of water hitting the
> antenna, but I don't believe that to be true. First of all, why would the
> noise die EXACTLY at the time the lightning discharge, when the drops must
> take a few seconds to fall? Secondly, why is it always worse on the
> highest antenna? If the drops are charged, the noise should be jusst as
> bad on a low antenna as one in the air. And third, why is the noise always
> less on a thick antenna, especially one without sharp ends sticking out?
>
> About two months ago, I used an 30 kV dc supply to charge a metal pipe
> spraying drops of water on a bare conductor connected to a receiver, and
> could detect no noise. I'm sure the drops were charged, because when I
> sprayed the anbtenna with no ground connection it built up enough charge
> in to arc 1/2 inch to ground when I removed all ground paths.
>
> On the other hand, charging the antenna to 30 kV produced the same
> sounding noise even in normal humid Georgia air.
>
> 73 Tom

Tom,

That info was interesting in light of my experience in CO. I live on the
west side of the Rockies. Most storms come out of the west, but some
upslope storms come from the north. The point is that I can hear arcing
on my KLM LPDA when an electrical storm is 20 or more miles away.
When I had a 260' dipole fed with 450 Ohm ladder line some years ago
I would get arcs across the tuner end of the feeders which I left
disconnected from the tuner when not in use.

I've never listened for static build up during those times as all antenna
cables are left disconnected when I'm not operating. I'll have to think
about a simple way to listen for the static buildup prior to a discharge
without damaging my receiver.

73's
Dave
W0MAY



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:25 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: Mike Valentine <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: rain static on dipole
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 09:14:55 -0400
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <527bgl$[e-mail]> <527o40$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 40.chicago-2.il.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E (Win95; U)
To: W8JI Tom <[e-mail]>

W8JI Tom wrote:
>
>
> On my high beam antennas and dipoles, I hear the noise during heavy rain.
> It builds to a loud roar. Then once in a while....  POP, a bolt of
> lightning flashes and the noise dies and starts to build back up.
>
> Some people claim the noise is from charged drops of water hitting the
> antenna, but I don't believe that to be true. First of all, why would the
> noise die EXACTLY at the time the lightning discharge, when the drops must
> take a few seconds to fall?

Hi Tom!

I too have noticed "rain" static ceasing and then rebuilding after a
nearby lightning stroke.  I normally hear this on my 6 meter and 2 meter
SSB/CW yagis up 130' or so in the air.

There are two types of noise that I often hear.  One is directly related
to rain drops.  As the rain is just starting, I begin to hear what sound
like individual drops "discharging" on the antenna, building in rate.
"pish ........... pish ...... pish...pish..pish.", etc.  This can then
build into a constant rumbling hiss.  This process, no matter what stage
of developement, is interuptable by a lightning stroke, when the noise
will briefly cease.

A second type of noise sounds like a spark-gap relaxation oscillator.
It starts off with a low repetition rate snapping sort of sound that
increases in rate into the audio frequency area, going from a growl to a
howl to a shriek in a non-monotonic way.  It, especially, quits when a
nearby lightning stroke flashes and then starts over from the begining.

I've been all over the house, bonding my copper box gutters to one
another and to the down spouts and then to ground with soldered copper
wire jumpers, all to no avail.  Weird as far as I'm concerned.

What say you about these?

Cheers,

Mike Valentine - WA8MSF (for a few more days)


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:26 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!munnari.OZ.AU!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Brent Jones)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: rain static on dipole
Date: 25 Sep 1996 13:53:41 -0700
Organization: US Antarctic Program, South Pole Station
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <527bgl$[e-mail]> <527o40$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: network.ucsd.edu

In article <527o40$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) writ
es:
>In article <527bgl$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Duane B.
>Smith) writes:
>
>On my high beam antennas and dipoles, I hear the noise during heavy rain.
>It builds to a loud roar. Then once in a while....  POP, a bolt of
>lightning flashes and the noise dies and starts to build back up.
>
>Some people claim the noise is from charged drops of water hitting the
>antenna, but I don't believe that to be true. First of all, why would the

What you are hearing there is corona.

But, you can get rain static which sounds similar, and does not
die away with lightning crashes.

I have more commonly experienced this as snow static, but occasionally
as rain static as well.  It was not corona related, as some of the
"rain" noise was caused by water blowing off the ocean when there were
no electrical storms (or clouds) around.

I was experiencing this at 249 and 300 Mhz, with water striking the
antennas with wind speeds in excess of 80 kts.  High winds with no water
did not produce the same results.  Snow static occurred for me when the
winds would be only 20 kts.

Brent


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:28 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.myriad.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: rain static on dipole
Date: 27 Sep 1996 04:42:16 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 95
Message-ID: <52flv8$[e-mail]>
References: <527bgl$[e-mail]> <527o40$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr17s8.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <[e-mail]>, Avatar <[e-mail]> writes:
>W8JI Tom wrote:
>>
>> In article <527bgl$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Duane B.
>> Smith) writes:
>>
>> >
>> >What causes "rain static" on a dipole?? I have a 160 meter horizontal
>> >dipole at 70ft height fed with 450 ohm ladder line. Every time it rains
>> >I get s9 "rain static" in my receiver. The antenna has been up for about
>> >a year and a half. When it's not raining the noise is gone except for
>> >normal band noise. Is there any way to prevent this?? I don't recall
>> >having this problem when the antenna was new. BTW the antenna is 12ga
>> >stranded copper insulated "thhn" electric wire. The antenna is not near
>> >any power lines and everything is grounded right outside the shack <
>> >10ft away.
>>
>> Hi Duane,
>>
>> First you have to be sure it's rain static, and not a hardware problem on
>> a power line.
>> If your receiver, on AM, makes a buzzing noise it's certainly power line
>> type noise. If it's a hiss, it could be either. Very high voltage three
>> phase lines sometimes make more of a hiss than a buzz, and it may be hard
>> to tell them from "rain static".
>>
>> If it is indeed rain static, I believe it is usually from corona discharge
>> from sharp points or thin wire ends in the antenna. Using insulated wire,
>> thick conductors, and avoiding sharp points on the antenna will help
>> reduce the noise, since all of these things reduce corona discharge. The
>> corna comes from the large potential difference between the grounded
>> antenna and the moist air around the antenna during the storm.
>>
>> On my high beam antennas and dipoles, I hear the noise during heavy rain.
>> It builds to a loud roar. Then once in a while....  POP, a bolt of
>> lightning flashes and the noise dies and starts to build back up.
>>
>> Some people claim the noise is from charged drops of water hitting the
>> antenna, but I don't believe that to be true. First of all, why would the
>> noise die EXACTLY at the time the lightning discharge, when the drops must
>> take a few seconds to fall? Secondly, why is it always worse on the
>> highest antenna? If the drops are charged, the noise should be jusst as
>> bad on a low antenna as one in the air. And third, why is the noise always
>> less on a thick antenna, especially one without sharp ends sticking out?
>>
>> About two months ago, I used an 30 kV dc supply to charge a metal pipe
>> spraying drops of water on a bare conductor connected to a receiver, and
>> could detect no noise. I'm sure the drops were charged, because when I
>> sprayed the anbtenna with no ground connection it built up enough charge
>> in to arc 1/2 inch to ground when I removed all ground paths.
>>
>> On the other hand, charging the antenna to 30 kV produced the same
>> sounding noise even in normal humid Georgia air.
>>
>> 73 Tom
>
>Tom,
>
>That info was interesting in light of my experience in CO. I live on the
>west side of the Rockies. Most storms come out of the west, but some
>upslope storms come from the north. The point is that I can hear arcing
>on my KLM LPDA when an electrical storm is 20 or more miles away.
>When I had a 260' dipole fed with 450 Ohm ladder line some years ago
>I would get arcs across the tuner end of the feeders which I left
>disconnected from the tuner when not in use.
>
>I've never listened for static build up during those times as all antenna
>cables are left disconnected when I'm not operating. I'll have to think
>about a simple way to listen for the static buildup prior to a discharge
>without damaging my receiver.
>
>73's
>Dave
>W0MAY
>

Tune a BC receiver to the low end of the band and listen to the corona
discharges build up on it!  Set it off station and just listen for the arcing.

You can hear it!  I've demonstrated this over repeaters, in person, and
OFTEN on shipboard to dumfounded observers!!

I get it all the time during the FROPA stuff here.  I can't disconnect as the
site is remote run for lots of stuff.  You get to hear it a lot in your own
receiver when running full connected line stuff.  Makes it tough during
contests on low bands during FROPA, but even your own line receiver can
go berserk during the build-ups..

It's just one of the joys of 80 meter CW CQWW during a front!!!


//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:29 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.myriad.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: rain static on dipole
Date: 27 Sep 1996 04:42:50 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <52fm0a$[e-mail]>
References: <527bgl$[e-mail]> <528u4g$[e-mail]> <52a0rk$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <52ehu3$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr17s8.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <52ehu3$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) writes:
>I'm surprised nobody has mentioned putting an RF choke across the antenna
>terminals to dissipate static. Hasn't anyone tried this, or doesn't it work?
If
>it doesn't work, does anyone know why not?
>
>Roy Lewallen, W7EL


//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:31 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.myriad.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: rain static on dipole
Date: 27 Sep 1996 05:01:28 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 64
Message-ID: <52fn38$[e-mail]>
References: <527bgl$[e-mail]> <528u4g$[e-mail]> <52a0rk$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <52ehu3$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr17s8.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <52ehu3$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) writes:
>I'm surprised nobody has mentioned putting an RF choke across the antenna
>terminals to dissipate static. Hasn't anyone tried this, or doesn't it work?
If
>it doesn't work, does anyone know why not?
>
>Roy Lewallen, W7EL

I can tell you from experience, it DOES work somewhat, but I supect that the
mechanism of all this is pretty complex.   All my antenna ride connected all
the time at my remote site.  They have to be.  They are all solid grounded,
thus, that's better than a pure choke, I think!

However, the noise STILL shows up Roy.  Aside from all of the shunt feed
I use, I use a vaccuum RF relay for QSK keying.  The contacts are arranged
so that th RX feed line on that side of the Jennings RJ-1 feeds the RX through

a a 1/8 amp 3AG fast blow fuse.  I think the current level is 1/8 amp,
it's the smallest current level I can buy.  There is an RF choke on the back
side of it that also has a pair of 1N34A diodes, back to back as an avalanche
type safeguard on the RX, the back side of the fuses.  Anything high enough to

trigger the 1N34A's is enough to blow the fuses.

My keying line is fixed so that the Jennings has to fire off the RX side of th
e
antenna line, against the ground line of the Jennings, also through an RF chok
e.
That makes sure that the RX is totall grounded when the TX line fires up hot
to the antenna.  It doubles as my key grounding line for all the rigs...  No
RX antenna ground; no TX RF output...

I've NEVER lost a RX yet, knock on wood.   I HAVE had to replace the fuses
three times in ten years, Roy.  I get hit direct, either antenna or power line
s
an average of about once every two years now over ten years.

I *CAN* hear the corona buildup start on my towers during passages.  The
mechanism, as far as I am concerned, is that discharge off some sharp point
somewhere, who really knows where, on an antenna.  It is different points
at different times.

At any time you can hear it, what is happening is that a little arc is going o
n
on off that point.  The your tower is already at ground potential.  It is the
feed point return for the current in that arc, no matter if your RF choke is
there or not.  Thus the noise is ALWAYS there during the arcing.  That is
what we call St. Elmo's Fire at sea.   I've seen it MANY times there as
a marine radio op on Texas A & M's research vessel in my younger days.

As one other ham commented here, the charge area involved in any strike
may be as much as 20 miles across.......

The whole business of lightning is fascinating and any ham that has metal
up there above the tree or power line height or near to it is going to
have corona a LOT more than they ever think, MANY times a year....

:)

All the choke might do, if it could, is simply complete the DC ground
for the antenna and drain off the DC current.  You can prove that by
looking across it with a simple VR tube.  They fire lit by DC, as the
voltage build up across the whole many mile across area of the charge
zone....


//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:32 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [e-mail](Jeff Anderson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: rain static on dipole
Date: 27 Sep 1996 11:53:46 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <52gf8a$[e-mail]>
References: <527bgl$[e-mail]> <528u4g$[e-mail]> <52a0rk$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <52ehu3$[e-mail]> <52fn38$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pax-ca14-06.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri Sep 27  4:53:46 AM PDT 1996

In <52fn38$[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>

>I use, I use a vaccuum RF relay for QSK keying.  The contacts are
>arranged so that th RX feed line on that side of the Jennings RJ-1
>feeds the RX through a a 1/8 amp 3AG fast blow fuse.  I think the
>current level is 1/8 amp, it's the smallest current level I can buy.
>There is an RF choke on the back side of it that also has a pair of
>1N34A diodes, back to back as an avalanche type safeguard on the RX,
>the back side of the fuses.  Anything high enough to trigger the
>1N34A's is enough to blow the fuses.

I'd worry that with an impulse the 1N34's might open before the fuse
does, and then you will have lost your protection.  A better device
might be a transorb or something that will clamp until the fuse blows.

- Jeff, WA6AHL



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:35 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.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 dipole
Date: 27 Sep 1996 17:43:18 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 31
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <52hhpm$[e-mail]>
References: <52gf8a$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <52gf8a$[e-mail]>, [e-mail](Jeff
Anderson) writes:

>
>>I use, I use a vaccuum RF relay for QSK keying.  The contacts are
>>arranged so that th RX feed line on that side of the Jennings RJ-1
>>feeds the RX through a a 1/8 amp 3AG fast blow fuse.  I think the
>>current level is 1/8 amp, it's the smallest current level I can buy.
>>There is an RF choke on the back side of it that also has a pair of
>>1N34A diodes, back to back as an avalanche type safeguard on the RX,
>>the back side of the fuses.  Anything high enough to trigger the
>>1N34A's is enough to blow the fuses.
>
>I'd worry that with an impulse the 1N34's might open before the fuse
>does

Well it's better than no protection, although I've foun 1N34's turn on at
too low a voltage and create all types of IMD. I use silicon high speed
switching diodes designed for high current high frequency switching
supplys for my clamps.

I'd worry about the fuse also. Fuses are notoriously unreliable and a 1/8
amp fuse is still darned big. I use a 50 mA 14 volt grain of wheat light
bulb as a fuse, and put my broadcast band filter between the fuse lamp and
the diodes.

I have a similar problem protecting inputs of PA's from excessive
excitation. A reed relay driven by an op-amp is faster than the fastest
fuse, but still too slow for a FET.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:38 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsrelay.courtave.net!news.inetnebr.com!news.mid.net!wormer.fn.net![e-mail]
From: Ken Bessler <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Reparing vertical
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 09:56:19 -0500
Organization: design Services Company
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cust136.fn.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win95; I)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] wrote:
>
> Has anyone out there ever successfully "spliced" a vertical antenna?
> I had to saw in half the wide aluminum section of an old Hy-Gain
> multibander when moving some time ago.  Now I'm interested in using it
> again.  Can one improvise a kind of mechanical "collar" to put the two
> pieces back together. And would it electrically work?
>
> 73 de Geoff, KC8EJE
> [e-mail]

You will probably be able to find a piece of aluminum tubing that will
fit over the old cut tubing. If not, try getting one that will fit inside.
Don't forget you can also use pipe, fence post tubing, etc. Use self
tapping sheetmetal screws to attach the splice to the old sections.

Also, you could make a "plug" splice by getting a hardwood dowel and having
it turned to the right size on a lathe. Make sure you treat the dowel with
some kind of sealer. To make the electrical connection you can use the
metal tape (used for air ducts - no, not duct tape - use the real metal
stuff). When you have the dowel in place, tape the joint then drive a few
sheet metal screws through the tape/old antenna tubing/dowel to make the
connection.

I did this last meathod about a year ago on 1 boom and 4 elements of a
Cushcraft 26b2 twin beam. It worked just fine!


                        Have fun!

                                Ken KG0WX

----------------------------------------------------------------------------**
*Police department's motto: "To serve and protect"
***Bomb squad's motto: "If you see us running, CATCH UP!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

P.S. Thursday, September 19th, 1996 - Happy birthday, Batman!

                        (Adam West, 68)


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:39 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-3.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-ana-24.sprintlink.net!news.tcd.net!news
From: "Jay E. Ostrem" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ringo and other 2m verticals: suggestions?
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 01:41:14 -0600
Organization: NETConnect, Utah
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vision17.vcn.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Monty Wilson wrote:
>
> All the while I planned my tower, I also planned to put a
> Ringo Ranger II antenna up, because I remember a Ringo my radio
> club used several years ago and its good performance and stats.
> Now my friend tells me the Ringos are bad about the screws
> coming out after some time in the wind, and suggests I get a
> Hustler instead.  He also says that anything fiberglass
> attracts lightning.
>
> Anyone else want to weigh in on this?  Anything I put up I want
> to have gain numbers at least as good as the Ranger II;
> otherwise I'd sooner build something myself.
>
> Can anyone confirm the business about the Ranger shaking loose?
> If so, can I just use loctite or lock washers in putting it
> together?
>
> --
> .........Monty.
> [e-mail]

Monty,

I have had two of these up for some time.  We have some extreme winds
here in Wyoming, and I've had no problems with anything loosening up.
I'm very happy with the performance also.  I highly recommend them

                Jay in Wyoming WC7M


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:40 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!ix.netcom.com!news
From: "William G. Graves" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Sailboat Antennas
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 06:57:03 -0700
Organization: Nereid Systems Inc.
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bba6b8$763ca5e0$92f881ce@John'sComputer.E-Z.net>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: lax-ca19-08.ix.netcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri Sep 20  8:57:05 AM CDT 1996
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

John Thompson wrote:
> 4. Use GTO-15 hi-voltage ignition wire (copper) not carbon, to connect
> antenna radiator to the antenna ceramic standoff on the tuner.. Use GE
> Silicon to cover the antenna and coupler connections for this wire..

> Do not use RG coax with a shield to feed the antenna!!
If the shield is not grounded, wouldn't this just behave like ignition
wire?  Could you explain what the problem is with using coax here ?
thanks
--
Bill Graves
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:41 1996
From: [e-mail] ("Anthony R. Gold")
Subject: Re: Sailboat Antennas
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bba6b8$763ca5e0$92f881ce@John'sComputer.E-Z.net> <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 96 15:14:33 GMT
Organization: Microvest Limited, London
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.30
Lines: 28
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!snunews.snu.ac.kr!news.kaist.ac.kr!usenet.seri.re.kr!news.postech.ac.kr!newsfeed.dacom.co.kr!arclight.uoregon.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!spool.mu.edu!newspump.sol.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sgi.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!cpk-news-feed2.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!microvst.demon.co.uk!tgold
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
X-NNTP-Posting-User: [e-mail]
X-Mail2News-Path: news.demon.net!microvst.dircon.co.uk

In article <[e-mail]>
           [e-mail] "William G. Graves" writes:

> John Thompson wrote:
> > 4. Use GTO-15 hi-voltage ignition wire (copper) not carbon, to connect
> > antenna radiator to the antenna ceramic standoff on the tuner.. Use GE
> > Silicon to cover the antenna and coupler connections for this wire..
>
> > Do not use RG coax with a shield to feed the antenna!!
> If the shield is not grounded, wouldn't this just behave like ignition
> wire?  Could you explain what the problem is with using coax here ?
> thanks

Coax will introduce added unwanted capacitance, which should not be
too troublesome to the Smartuner but it will tend to require the
introduction of added tuner inductance, which is relatively lossy.
It will also add some immaterial dielectric losses, and also add the
possibility of flashover if the voltage exceeds the breakdown rating
of say RG58 or some other 1/4" cable.  Using RG213 or other 1/2"
cable would probably avoid that particular risk, and it might even
prove to be a safety feature by keeping high rf voltages even further
out of reach of people by surrounding it with a grounded braid.

Regards,
--
   Tony - G3SKR / AA2PM                  email: [e-mail]
                                                [e-mail]
                                        packet: g3skr@n0ary.#nocal.ca.usa.na


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:42 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!dziuxsolim.rutgers.edu!muon.rutgers.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Kevin Chase)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Spring cleaning surprise, anyone want it?
Date: 24 Sep 1996 22:28:26 -0400
Organization: Rutgers University
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <52a5ca$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: muon.rutgers.edu

Hi y'all,

Over the weekend I was cleaning out some closets at my parent's home
and found a kit from Radio Shack for a long (75 ft) bare antenna.
I bought it when I was like ten years old, intending to set it outside
and pick up shortwave signals with it (I think, it was many years ago).
I never did get around to doing so, though and it has sat in a
closet unappreciated for at least fifteen years.
It's pretty simple, a long bare wire, a long insulated lead in wire, two
strain insulators, etc.  Anyhow, I figured someone in this group
might want it more than I and be willing to pay the shipping cost.
If you are that someone, drop me an email and I'll send it off.

--Kevin
--
    __O   |                            Kevin Chase |   O__
  _+\<+_  |              [e-mail] |  _+>/+_
 ( )/ ( ) | http://www.physics.rutgers.edu/~chase/ | ( ) \( )


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:43 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!news.cyberg8t.com!host44.cyberg8t.com!user
From: [e-mail] (Raymond Sarrio)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Test your antenna knowledge->1st ham crossword puzzle now online
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 11:24:08 -0700
Organization: Raymond Sarrio Co.
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: host44.cyberg8t.com

What fun way to test your ham radio knowledge. If you have a java capable
browser (Netscape 3.0, 2.0 with jave plug-in, or Microsoft Explorer 3.0)
you will be able to try your hand at, the 1st ever, Ham Radio Crossword
Puzzle. You will find the crossword puzzle at http://www.sarrio.com
--
The Raymond Sarrio Co. a full feature Ham Radio Storefront and web site develo
per. Located at http://www.sarrio.com.

In association with Brillar Enterprises http://win-win.com/brillar provider of
 discount CD-Roms!



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:43 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!nntp.newsfirst.com!nntp.crosslink.net!munnari.OZ.AU!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news.service.uci.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Brian Williams)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Test your antenna knowledge->1st ham crossword puzzle now online
Date: 25 Sep 1996 05:39:09 GMT
Organization: UCI Medical Center
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <52aght$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialin9210.slip.uci.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.5

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

>you will be able to try your hand at, the 1st ever, Ham Radio
>Crossword Puzzle.

Sorry, ham radio crossword puzzles have been published for at LEAST a
year on packet.

Brian



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:44 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!enews.sgi.com!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!agate!newsgate.duke.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!cs.umd.edu!newsfeed.gsfc.nasa.gov!newsroom.gsfc.nasa.gov!usenet
From: [e-mail] (NR3O, Chris Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc.
Subject: VHF Antenna that Looks Like TV Antenna
Date: 23 Sep 1996 13:20:06 GMT
Organization: Hughes Team (EOSDIS)
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <5262q6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lo-pc2105.hitc.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.5
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24314 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:16802

I am looking for an article that is supposed to be in CQ, I think from
years ago.  Bill Orr's book "Simple, Low-Cost Wire Antennas for Radio
Amateurs" has something called a CIA Special.  This ant is designed to
look like a TV antenna, but is really a 6, 2 and 220 antenna.
It has 2 beams, stacked.  Each beam has a pair of 6 meter dipoles in a vee
shape about 1/4 wave apart.

Anyhow, I got it to work on 6 meters using their suggested tuner design, but I

can't get it to work on 2 (3:1 SWR is best I can do).

I am hoping that whomever told me it was once in CQ Magazine is correct and
that I can get hold of copy of the article to get more info than I have in
the book to get it going on 2 meters.

Any help appreciated!  73 de Chris NR3O

Please respond to email at [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:45 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!swrinde!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!news1.radix.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Chuck Spafford)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: VHF/UHF Antennas, PLEASE advice...
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1996 12:53:34 GMT
Organization: Cen-Trex Computer Services
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialin9.annex1.radix.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/16.227

On 21 Sep 96 12:41:11 GMT Miro Ivankovic, SKS[ Maribor wrote in
rec.radio.amateur.antenna:

>Hello,
>
>Can anyone suggest some proven VHF/UHF antennas for the
>ar8000 scanner:

Radio Shack markets a mobile magnetic mount scanner antenna that also
can be used for transmitting on the 2-meter, 220, and 440 Amateur
bands.  I used it with my scanner when I was with the fire department
and it worked beautifully.




73, de Chuck Spafford
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:46 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: Thomas Isgro <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Want to buy HF vertical multiband antenna
Date: 24 Sep 1996 13:31:53 GMT
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <528ns9$[e-mail]>
References: <52862e$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 125.detroit-2.mi.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22ATT (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Dragan Stojanovic) wrote:
>
>Hi there,
>
>Want to buy HF vertical multiband antenna such as R5, R7 or any MFJ.
>
>Send your offer by E-mail to [e-mail]. I'll pay S/H.
>
>73's
>
>Dragan (EX ET3YU)
>
>
>
>                          Dragan Stojanovic <> [e-mail]
>
>


Don't overlook the Butternut. I have an HF6V that;s doing wonders on a 10
meter band that doesn't open very often.  Sorry it's not for sale.





From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:47 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!ulysses.midtown.net!sl30.midtown.net!user
From: [e-mail] (Bryan Cowan)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Wanted FM yagi antenna
Date: 20 Sep 1996 01:16:50 GMT
Organization: Midtown Computer Services
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sl30.midtown.net

I would like to buy a FM yagi antenna. Should be small enough to use in my
apartment. Radio Shack doesn't carry them.


From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:48 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news1.erols.com!news.bconnex.net!news.lightlink.com!light.lightlink.com!siram
From: Siegfried Rambaum <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WTB - TV Sat Antenna
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 10:06:05 -0400
Organization: ART MATRIX - LIGHTLINK
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <527oi7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: light.lightlink.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
To: Antonio D Robinson <[e-mail]>
In-Reply-To: <527oi7$[e-mail]>

On Tue, 24 Sep 1996, Antonio D Robinson wrote:

> WTB - older 15-12 foot alum TV Sat Antenna, just the antenna and mount.

Just a hint: Look in your yellow pages for scrap metal recycling
             companies. In my town, the local srap dealer has several
             of these big sat dishes in his yard. They will be kind of
             folded and then be shipping to an aluminum hut. If I was
             interested in one of those, it would not go as a "used
             TV satellite dish", but as "aluminum scrap", priced by
             the pound based on alu crap prices plus a small margin
             for the dealer (it is a for profit operation), but it
             still would be a lot cheaper to buy it as "aluminum scrap"
             than as a "used satellite dish"...



From [e-mail] Fri Sep 27 21:54:49 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news1.best.com!nntp1.best.com!usenet
From: Scott Covey <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WTB: HyGain Hy-Tower
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 19:25:59 -0700
Organization: Best Internet Communications
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: scottc.vip.best.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

I'm looking for Hy Gain Hy Tower - used antenna. If youwant to part with
yours please let me know.

Thanks

Scott Covey
[e-mail]
KE6DFW


From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:01 1996
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: ???looking for plans for 2m yagi.....
Date: 25 Sep 1996 14:52:51 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <52bh03$[e-mail]>
References: <01bba8bc$d039fd80$29df93cd@andysher>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news1.agis.net!agis!news1.opcenter.net!news3.agis.net!agis!news.mxol.com!news.ingress.net!imci3!imci5!pull-feed.internetmci.com!calliope.wln.com!info.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!news.sgi.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.stealth.net!demos!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz

In article <01bba8bc$d039fd80$29df93cd@andysher>,
Andy and Sherry <[e-mail]> wrote:
>I'm looking for detailed plans on 10 or 12 element yagi ant. which use a
>metal boom. I have search the web. and newsgroups got some info. , none of
>it complete.

Have you come across DJ9BV's design in the DUBUS magazine? it has
become quite popular with EME'ers.

73, Moritz

DL5UH


From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:02 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.randomc.com!news.miracle.net!wariat.org!uunet!in1.uu.net!mr.net!visi.com!dimensional.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Richard MacDonald)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HELP WITH CHIMNEY MOUNT OF ANTENNA
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 11:15:31 -0600
Organization: Dimensional Communications
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: p03.pm-4.pm.dimensional.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227

On 24 Sep 1996 23:42:18 GMT, [e-mail] (Rich & Katy Mulvey)
wrote:

>On Tue, 24 Sep 1996 02:35:31 GMT, [e-mail] <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>I'd like to mount a cushcraft r7000 on my chimney with perhps
>>a 3' mast above the top of the chimney (so 27' total hieght)
>>can anyone give me some pointers on mounting hardware,
>>or reference material?
>>thanks
>
>
>John:
>
>   Chimney mounts are generally discouraged, because the repeated
>flexing of the mast tends to cause the bricks to separate sooner than
>nature intended.  I've seen this happen more than once.
>
>   If you do want to go that way, I have seen people who have used the
>Radio Shack chimney-mount hardware to good effect.  It's reasonably
>stable in high winds with an R7, at least. YMMV.
>
>- Rich
>
>
I can only second Rich's recommendation that you not use a chimney mount. It i
s
much better to attach a mast to the peak of the house than to strain the
chimney. I seem to recall that when I worked in an electronic distributor back
in 1955 we continually told people not to put their TV antennas on chimneys. W
e
especially told them that after our company's owner had his chimney come down
with the antenna!




From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:07 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.sgi.com!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!news.vcd.hp.com!news
From: Don Huff <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Hamstick "dipole" vs. IsoLoop
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 12:33:15 -0700
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <529khk$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpvcldu.vcd.hp.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; HP-UX A.09.05 9000/720)

"Loop
> antennas like the AEA or MFJ are almost as efficient as dipoles. That is the
 nature of their designs."
>  "Loop antenna cost allot (a lot), are slow to use, are
> smaller than a hamstick dipole and are almost as efficient as a full
> size dipole."
>

Hi John,

   A little analysis with the help of either of J. Kraus's textbooks
"antennas" will reveal that a small loop's efficiency depends very
highly on its ohmic losses at the frequency of use.  Theoretically, a
small loop's radiating ability is only a fraction of a dB less than a
theoretical halfwave dipole.  But here's the rub:  The RADIATION
RESISTANCE (that imaginary resistance we invented to account for the
loss of power (through radiation) from an antenna), of a loop of say 1
meter in diameter is in the 10's of MILLIOHMS range.  With a loop
conductor of, say, 1 inch diameter, just the losses in the conductor
(aluminum assumed) alone will put you about 6 dB below a dipole on 20
meters.  This is due to the ohmic losses in the conductor being in the
same ballpark as the radiation resistance itself. Minus 6 dB is 1/4 the
radiating power, folks!  So it is definitely NOT true that a small loop
in  practice even approaches the efficiency of a dipole, which has a
radiation resistance of the order of 72 ohms, and is easily made to have
ohmmic losses an order of magnitude or two less than 72 ohms, just by
using common wire sizes.  Also the above figures for a small loop assume
an IDEAL environent, in the clear, and away from other metallic objects
at least out to 1/6 wavelength (the extent of the near field).  So,
attic (or condo balcony/metal railing) installations are going to be
many dB below this.

  Incidentally, the radiating ability of a small DIPOLE is just as good
as a small loop, theoretically.  So, a 0.1 wavelength dipole can be made
to radiate just as efficiently as a small loop of say 0.1 waves in
circumfrence.  Jerry Sevick, W2FMI, many years ago also demonstrated
that the same is true for very short vertical radiators, if steps are
taken to keep loss resistance very low (use of 100 radials for example).

  The marketing hype for small commercially made amateur transmitting
loops is perhaps the most outrageous of any antenna type (with the
possible exception of the "launching, radiating gap" of the GAP vertical
dipole antenna).  AEA originally advertized their Isoloop as having the
same radiating efficiency as a dipole, but (wisely) soon retracted that
from their advertising, after knowledgeable readers took them to task.

  The theory of small loops and other antennas is very well established
over many decades.  (Kraus analyzed the small loop antenna in his
original volume of Antennas, in the 1940's).  It is amazing to see the
claims made today for such well understood antenna configurations.

   As always, OMs,  CAVEAT EMPTOR.

     73,
           Don,  W6JL


            I don't speak for my employer, and they do not speak for me.


From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:07 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!news-e2a.gnn.com!pop.gnn.com!KF4HK
From: [e-mail] (Jim Miller)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Source for push up masts
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 07:37:52
Organization: GNN
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <52dpnm$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 8-107.client.gnn.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-GNN-NewsServer-Posting-Date: 26 Sep 1996 11:34:14 GMT
X-Mailer: GNNmessenger 1.3

Kory; Contact Rohn tower dealer; they make several types. Get the
heavy duty 50' model. Extend larger dia. sections for your beam.
Smaller dia. sections will stay inside to beef up.
GL-73
Jim [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:08 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Midwest Mobile Shootout
Date: 26 Sep 1996 14:05:56 GMT
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <52e2k4$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 201.phoenix-2.az.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22ATT (Windows; U; 16bit)

"C. J. Hawley" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>I think it's clear that if you
>want to learn anything, you have to measure and perfectly match each
>antenna system or know why you can't.

Hi Chuck, not taking reflected power into account could put hams
with antenna tuners inside the car at a disadvantage they do not
deserve. For someone with 150w forward and 50w reflected, the
transmitter is only generating 100w so total power should always
be forward power minus reflected power. W6KKT does that at the
CA mobile antenna shootout.

73, Cecil, W6RCA




From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:09 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!munnari.OZ.AU!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Jack Taylor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Rain static on dipole
Date: 26 Sep 96 15:14:19 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <10180@NJ7P>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

I too had a two element quad which was quiet during rain/snow storms.
When I moved I put up a triband yagi at the new location and yup, static
noise during stormy periods is part of our existance.  Also experince the
noise build-up with a large SNAP! then quiet, cycles.

Have speculated that a carbon resistor across the driven element, perhaps
10 times or so the load impedance, would act to dissapate the static charge.
However, haven't attempted this experiment, so can't say for sure if that
would be a solution.

73 de Jack




From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:10 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!EU.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!news.whidbey.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (David M Schertzer)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: "N E W" 30-50mhz Antenna!
Date: 28 Sep 1996 00:13:22 GMT
Organization: DND
Lines: 14
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <52hqj2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: asn173.whidbey.net
X-Newsreader: News for Windows NT X1.0-92

*** NEW*** NEW***NEW*****
Antenna Specialist - ASPS593
Hi-Power, Cowl (fender) mount Disguise Antenna
30-50 mhz (low band)
Looks like a normal AM/FM car antenna
Original packaging + box
$50.00 shipped via UPS (CONUS) or
trade for anything you may have?

Oak Harbor, WA   USA
Ham Radio - VE7-LFA/W7
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:14 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.myriad.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Dormitory 6m nightmare
Date: 28 Sep 1996 16:10:33 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <52jilp$[e-mail]>
References: <52ilmr$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup536.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <52ilmr$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Thomas N
 Tumino) writes:
>Fellow hams, I am a college student in a 10th floor single room that does
>not have any water pipes.  I can mount antennas a vertical steel sheet
>under my window, however I have yet to achieve an SWR of less than 1.9:1
>or so (with an ungrounded mfj tuner for six).
>
>I am trying to run my 2 to 6m transverter with 10w output..
>
>Any ideas for an antenna I can use?  Is it worthwile to ground my tuner to
>the third wire of the outlet?  Will that put any rf on my power line?
>
>Thanks for the help!
>
>Thomas N2YTF

Why not a smaller version of the AES "Iso-loop" for you?

That should be easy to build and could be easy to run out the window on a
pole like a broom stick handle!  Reach "OUT" for DX; suck wind for PROTEX!
Made as a relatively large-for-the-frequency loop with a relatively small
capacitor, you could have a balanced antenna with less horizontal profile than

a dipole.

You could even use something as simple as to aluminum plates on the ends
of the loop with bolts and nuts on screws to adjust the frequency.  That is
what they do on commercial varients of this.

You could also stack a pair of them and get a little gain...   :)

//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:17 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!mhv.net!news.westnet.com!stevens-tech.edu!newsserver.jvnc.net!newsserver2.jvnc.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!news.mindspring.com!cpk-news-feed3.bbnplanet.com!news.mountain.net!poco.mountain.net!usenet
From: ken coleman <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Problems GAP Titan DX, who knows ?
Date: Sat, 28 Sep 1996 17:01:14 -0400
Organization: MountainNet, Inc. Morgantown WV 800.444.1458
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.77.21.21
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win95; I)

Bart Mudde wrote:
>
> Hello OM,
> I just erected a Gap Titan DX, but the SWR is very bad on 21 and 3.5
> Mhz. In the papers of the antenne I couldn't find anything. I want this
> antenne just for CW and there for the top C was included, but the SWR is
> good with 3600 and not for 3500.
> On 21000 the SWR is good at 21250.
> Maybe somebody knows also the e mail address of Gap ?
> 73 es cuagn de Bart PA3GGMThe only way I knew I had not made a good coax con
nection on the
feedline was a bad SWR on 15 and 80.  It actually looked OK elsewhere,
but I had a short in the braid to center post.  Check continuity between
 both center post and outer shell and the piece of the antenna (base?)
you can reach.  If have continuity on that part from both inside pin
and outside (braid), you had trouble with the (what in my
opinion was) not-so-good coax, just as I did (recognizing the
shortcomings of the not-so-good-coax-connector-solderer.  Try it.  The
antenna is great and trouble free.



From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:18 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!news1.erols.com!news.bconnex.net!news2.insinc.net!news.worldlink.ca!news-admin
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WTB Fiberglas rod or information on supplier
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 1996 02:54:27 GMT
Organization: WorldLink Internet Services, Inc.  Ottawa, Ontario
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <52m302$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: a016m.worldlink.ca
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

I am building a 160 meter vertical and need a two foot piece of 5/8"
solid fiberglas rod.  I have not been able to find a supplier. Does
anyone know of one or have a piece of 5?8" rod for sale?
Thanks,  Larry VE3WLN



From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:19 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.accessone.com!news.cstone.net!newshost.cyberramp.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!news.island.net!ham!rs
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Bad reception on FM-radio installed on wheelchair
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 28 Sep 96 21:08:59 PDT
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Distribution: world
Organization: The Curmudgeon's Cottage
Lines: 74

[e-mail] (Bryan Cowan) writes:

> In article <52c7sp$[e-mail]>, Bart Raeymaekers
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Last year I've installed an FM-radio on my electrical wheelchair. It
> > was not very cheap, it had a pricetag of over $1000. But it was worth
> > it, at least, that's what I thought, because the music sounded great
> > and the reception was excellent. But oh boy, was I disappointed when I
> > turned on the wheelchair, goodbye music, hello AWFUL reception!! Heaps
> > of interference, the only station I could still receive was a local
> > radiostation in our town, all the other stations lots of interference.
> > Obvious question, is it possible to improve the reception or to get
> > rid of the interference?? I must say, the wheelchair is computer-
> > controlled and it seems this computer causes the interference.
> > Technicians of BOSCH tried to fix the problem, after two hours the
> > only thing they achieved was to short circuit my 24v->12v-
> > transformator! If even technicians of BOSCH can't fix the problem, who
> > can!!??
>
> I hope you didn't pay $1000 for this radio, because you got ripped off.
> Demand your money back. My guess is that it's the motor on your wheelchair
> causing the problem-computers are designed not to interfere with broadcast
> band stations. After you get your money back from the asshole who sold you
> this radio, my best advice would be to buy a cheap, battery operated FM
> radio (DO NOT pay more than about $20US!), buy a metal electrical project
> box from an electronics supply store, and put the radio inside the box.
> These boxes are made of steel so RF won't interfere with the circuitry,
> and hopefully that will null the crap generated by your wheelchair's
> motor. If that doesn't work you're out of luck, and only out about $30US.

I hope you disregarded this "advice", since a radio INSIDE a steel box
isn't going to receive ANYTHING.

Next, you need to determine where the interference is coming from. Is it
entering the radio through its power leads or via the antenna? If the
power leads, wrapping them around a ferrite core, or using a snap on
ferrite choke may help. If it's coming via the antenna, then the
computer, the motors or the associated wiring are radiating the
interference, and must either be shielded or have electrical filtering
added to eliminate it.

If the motors are arcing, adding capacitors to the power leads,
and wrapping the leads around a snap on choke may help. If it's coming
from the computer, you may be able to shield the computer with a metal
cover, or use spray on paint made for this purpose. If it's coming from
the leads going to the computer, using shielded cables, and toroid
chokes may help as well.

There's also a good book on eliminating radio frequency interference
available from the American Radio Relay League (ARRL) - the American
national ham radio organization. The book is called "Radio Frequency
Interference: How to Find and Fix It", and is available for about $15
from the ARRL, 225 Main Street, Newington CT 06111, USA.

There's also good information on RF interference available from the
F.C.C. at their web page site. (http://www.fcc.gov/).

I hope this helps.

Good Luck, Bob.





[e-mail]                             __|
Robert Smits                                _/. |\
(VE7HS)                CQ CQ CQ !!!        <   (0)
                                       _   /__    |
                                      ( ) <_______/
                                       \ \/       \__


From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:20 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!spool.mu.edu!munnari.OZ.AU!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Martin Ellis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: VOACAP - voawin for Windows 95?
Date: 29 Sep 96 04:35:23 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <199608030142.SAA26985@.mail.ucsd.edu>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Greetings from New Zealand
I am not sure if this the correct reflector, but I would
appreciate advice on the VOACAP propagation program, as described
in September 1996 QST P31-32.
I have downloaded the voawin.hml file, and changed the filename to
voawin.exe and run it to extract 21 files.
The readme.txt file states "The software has been loaded on
Windows-95 and required *some* modification to work..."
Does any reader have experience of the mods needed for Windows-95?
Regards,
Martin ZL1ANJ
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:21 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.inc.net!uwm.edu!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Helical wound antenna
Date: 29 Sep 1996 03:56:56 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 49
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <52la48$[e-mail]>
References: <52g4o2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <52g4o2$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Atsushi Otsuka) writes:

>(1) What is the total length of the element wire wound on the pole?

Wire length is dependent on the distributed inductance and capacitance in
the element, and will vary greatly with winding pitch, wire size,
dielectric near the wire, and the antenna length. There is no exact rule.

The smallest length wire would be used if the winding was concentrated
near the feepoint, the longest length if winding pitch is concentrated
near the outer end.

>(2) How do you explain the operation of the antenna?

It is a simple loaded antenna, but it uses a very poor coil spread out
over a large area.
It has lower radiation resistance, more loss, and can have less bandwidth
than better designed systems.

>Is it the same as the 1/4 wavelength vertical antenna?

The helical antenna is less efficient and has lower radiation resistance,
so in that resspect it is different.

>(3) Why do you need to wind the element?

Because if the antenna is too short physically series inductance, end
capacitance, or a combination of the two is needed to make the antenna
resonant. Winding the element adds distributed series inductance.

>What is the advantage of winding the element?

Mutual coupling increases the inductance per unit length of space, and
that gives "free" inductance without having extra wire length. A longer
wire, required for the same reactance without mutual inductance, has more
resistive loss and lowers efficiency.

That's why proper shaped coils are so efficient for loading. Helical
antennas, as a general rule, are among the least efficient of all designs.

Radiation occurs because of charge acceleration over spacial distance, so
the wire length wound up is totally unimportant to radiation fields. Only
the length from tip to tip is important. For maximum radiation make the
physical length as long as possible with the least resistance (shortest
wire) in between, and concentrate loading at the high voltage end of the
element.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:22 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.inlink.com!news.dra.com!news.mid.net!news.sdsmt.edu!news.wildstar.net!cancer.vividnet.com!hunter.premier.net!news1.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (PTracy)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: rain static on dipole
Date: 29 Sep 1996 04:10:27 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 12
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <52latj$[e-mail]>
References: <52flv8$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <52flv8$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:

>I get it all the time during the FROPA stuff here.  I can't disconnect as
the
>
>site is remote run for lots of stuff.  You get to hear it a lot in your
own
>receiver when running full connected line stuff.  Makes it tough during
>contests on low bands during FROPA, but even your own line receiver can
>go berserk during the build-ups..

What is FROPA?


From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:23 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (PTracy)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Rain static on dipole
Date: 29 Sep 1996 04:16:58 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 14
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <52lb9q$[e-mail]>
References: <52idji$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <52idji$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
writes:

>If you bent the tips of the yagi down, or put big balls on them, they
>would likely be as good or better than a quad because the conductor size
>is larger..  larger conductors mean a lower voltage gradient and less
>tendancy for corona, hence the rings and balls on EHV power lines near
>towers.

Also in hv supplies on cap terminals, etc...  When I used to put hv
supplies together for running lasers, we would turn the supply on, and
turn off the lights.  It was immediately obvious where the unit needed
some more "tuning".  Ocassionally made our own little lighning bolts.  Was
I ever glad when we went from DC excited to rf excited lasers!


From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:24 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!csn!nntp-xfer-1.csn.net!news-2.csn.net!usenet
From: "Stan Huntting" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: VOACAP - voawin for Windows 95?
Date: 29 Sep 1996 12:58:55 GMT
Organization: SRHuntting. Inc.
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <01bbae06$11b482a0$[e-mail]>
References: <199608030142.SAA26985@.mail.ucsd.edu> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 199.117.25.3
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

I don't recall making any mods at all in my installation.

Martin Ellis <[e-mail]> wrote in article
<[e-mail]>...
> Greetings from New Zealand
> I am not sure if this the correct reflector, but I would
> appreciate advice on the VOACAP propagation program, as described
> in September 1996 QST P31-32.
> I have downloaded the voawin.hml file, and changed the filename to
> voawin.exe and run it to extract 21 files.
> The readme.txt file states "The software has been loaded on
> Windows-95 and required *some* modification to work..."
> Does any reader have experience of the mods needed for Windows-95?
> Regards,
> Martin ZL1ANJ
> [e-mail]


--
----------------------------------------------
Stan Huntting,    KF0IA
Email:            [e-mail]
Fax:              303 444 2314
KaWin home page:  http://www.mutadv.com/kawin/
Postal address:   4655 Pleasant Ridge Rd.,
                  Boulder, CO 80301-1731, USA



From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:40 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!corn.cso.niu.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (David Gersic)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna construction for FM reception?
Date: 29 Sep 1996 14:58:41 GMT
Organization: Northern Illinois University
Lines: 65
Message-ID: <52m2r1$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (David Gersic)
NNTP-Posting-Host: isdn1-22.cso.niu.edu
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.02

I've been lurking for a couple of days now, and though this group seems to
be mainly Ham-oriented, maybe I'm not completely off topic with this one.
I have not seen a FAQ posting, so if this is one, please post the FAQ
location and I'll go read it.

The backround: there are really only two FM radio stations that I like. One
of them is the local NPR outlet @ 90.5 with a local transmitter so
reception is not a problem. The other is a Chicago station @ 93.1, with a
transmitter about 80 miles away, which I have not been able to get decent
(or any) reception of.

I started out with a standard cheap wire antenna which has two problems: it
doesn't work very well and it has a very low "Wife Approval Factor".

Then, for a while, I was able to get radio reception off of our local cable
system, but that has been removed by the local cable company and is no
longer an option.

I then tried one of those $30 "powered" antenna w/booster amp things. Works
about as well as the bent wire, but at least it is smaller and a lot less
ugly.

So, I'm now thinking of an attic antenna. I really don't want anything
mounted on the roof of my house, nor do I want a "tower" or anything like
that if I can help it.

Questions:

Will an attic antenna even work for this application? Yes, it might be less
than ideal, but given that I don't want a 100' tower in my backyard, should
it be better than my current configuration?

I did a Web search and turned up references to the Yagi-Uda antenna design
as being  (a) cheap, (b) easy to build, and (c) pretty good overall. URLs:

        http://www.ee.washington.edu/eeca/circuits/yagi.txt
        http://www.phoenix.net/USERS/biekert/vjb.html

Neither one of these covers the physical construction of the antenna very
well. Can somebody point out a reference/URL with more information on these
things? A picture of a completed one would be ideal, as well as a
description of how to figure the lengths of pieces and distances between
them. I'm not an EE, but can follow a description of what to do and why;
physical construction looks pretty simple and I can handle that part easily
enough.

If I mount the antenna in the attic, what type of cable should I run from
it to the receiver? CATV Coax?

I've already seen references to the ARRL Antenna Handbook and am going to
see about acquiring a copy tomorrow. Are there any other printed references
I should be looking in?

Is there something better than a Yagi design that I should try for this?


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

    The packet goes out the card, into the copper, out the router,
    onto the fiber, across the world, thru the copper............
    NOTHING BUT NET.

David Gersic                                           [e-mail]
Systems Programmer                        Northern Illinois University



From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:40 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!news1.erols.com!hunter.premier.net!news.cais.net!news2.cais.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Gary Mitchelson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Trigonal reflectors
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 1996 15:08:54 GMT
Organization: Racal
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: garym.cais.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99d/32.182

Has anyone had any experiance or thoughts on Trigonal refelectors?
I was thinking of adding one to my 5 element 6M yagi.

N3JPU


From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:41 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!news1.erols.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!not-for-mail
From: "Keith Daniels" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: AM Antennas
Date: 29 Sep 1996 16:01:06 GMT
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <01bbae27$8e51be60$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.251.143.147
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

Hello all! Obviously I am new to the newsgroup.I am looking for some info
and maybe someone can help me.I live in an area where I can put up an
antenna wherever I want however I want.The only exception is cost.What I am
looking for is how to build an AM antenna to pull in distant stations well
during the day as well as at night,If thats possible.Any directions to info
onn this would be appreciated. I have the antenna book that radio shack
sells, but it doesnt have much info on AM antennas. Thank you .


                Keith



From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:42 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!news2.digex.net!news6.digex.net!news.gteais.com!news
From: aor <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Power Splitters/Combiners
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 1996 12:11:10 -0400
Organization: gteais-org
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: r1p1.gteais.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

I am building a 2 meter amplifier using a pair of MRF-151G VHF
transistors (300 watts each).  The Motorola Application Note has the
input and output transformers (and ferrite cores) to cover 10MHz thru
175 MHz.  The input and output transformers use 25 Ohm rigid mini coax
with cores.  These are the 48v transistors.

How can I combine these two amplifiers using combiners/splitters which
will cover 10-150MHz?  I know how to do this for single band operation.
My goal is to have 600 watts on 10 meters, 6 meters, and 2 meters thru
this one amp.  It will be mounted on the tower, so I will not have
access to it once installed.

Any thoughts, suggestions, or articles would be a big help.

73, and thanks in advance.

Al, NW2M


From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:43 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.randomc.com!imci5!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!news.cic.net!news.gatecom.com!gatecoms!emesis
From: [e-mail] (Harry Gibson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How to...
Date: 29 Sep 1996 17:08:18 GMT
Organization: Gateway Communications Inc.
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <52mae2$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: gatecoms.gatecom.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Samuel Cossette ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Hello

: I have a FM transmitter and I would like to increase the broadcast.

: Help me pleaze

: Sam
: [e-mail]


The answer is maybe !  Too general an answer?  Too general a question.
Be more specific.
                                           jAy



From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:44 1996
From: [e-mail] ("Anthony R. Gold")
Subject: Re: 6 mtr. antenna thoughts
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <52m9uh$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 96 17:50:09 GMT
Organization: Microvest Limited, London
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.30
Lines: 28
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!newspump.sol.net!news.inc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!microvst.demon.co.uk!tgold
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
X-NNTP-Posting-User: [e-mail]
X-Mail2News-Path: news.demon.net!microvst.dircon.co.uk

In article <52m9uh$[e-mail]> [e-mail]  writes:

> Seems that it would solve the problem, only that most man made
> interference is vertically polarized which is probably why the SSB long
> distance stuff is achieved horizontally. If I remember correctly, if a
> person with a horizontal antenna were to have a QSO with another who was
> using a vertical antenna there would be a corresponding signal loss
> equivalent to about 20 dB (1,000 times). Any one correct me on this.

The isolation or coupling between cross-polarised antennas will
depend on whether there are any reflections which might cause the
polarization to rotate or scatter and become less linearly polarised.
In free space, the coupling between perfectly polarised antennas
aligned perfectly at cross-plane will be zero, or an infinite signal
loss versus the antennas when aligned in parallel polarisation.

20 dB may be a practical number between fairly close line-of sight
antennas, but then in that situation a 20 dB signal reduction may
well not prevent good communication anyway.  BTW, a 20dB reduction is
a 100 fold reduction in power which would result in just a 10 fold
reduction in signal voltage at the receiver antenna terminal.  I'm
not sure what that 1,000 times comes from.

Regards,
--
   Tony - G3SKR / AA2PM                  email: [e-mail]
                                                [e-mail]
                                        packet: g3skr@n0ary.#nocal.ca.usa.na


From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:45 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-11.sprintlink.net!news.scott.net!usenet
From: Bill Levey <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: FREE Web Swap Shop
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 1996 13:15:10 -0500
Organization: BRO dot NET Internet Marketing
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup16.scott.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Amateurs are invited to post items for sale on the new
BARC (Birmingham Amateur Radio Club) Web Swap Shop.
Submissions are added immediately and at no cost.

--> http://bro.net/barc/forsale.html
    http://bro.net/barc/additem.html

73!
Bill Levey - WA4FAT


From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:46 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!news1.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.myriad.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 40-80-160 vertical
Date: 29 Sep 1996 18:27:50 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 96
Message-ID: <52mf36$[e-mail]>
References: <52h3fn$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup554.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <52h3fn$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Terry Burge) w
rites:
>
>I figure I can put up a full 1/4 wavelength 40 meter radiator, maybe
>a 1/4 wavelenght (or near it) 80 meter vertical (centered around 3800),
>and then a 50-60 foot vertical center loaded for 160 meters. Maybe even add
>a capacitance hat to the 160.

See post in final paragraph...  take next subject first...  :)

>I am also considering using raised, insulated vertical (somewhat
>less high with a raised 'ground plane' radiator system in order to get the
>efficiency up. This of course means I'll have to worry more about lightning
>strikes and probably won't be able to get the radiators much longer that 45
>or 50 feet above an insulator at 8-10 feet.

I can tell you from experience of multiple hits, that the elevated deal suffer
s
more than the fully grounded one..  I lowered the new 80 meter array
to ground level for just this reason.

>I figure on using pvc for the insulated cross members and making the 3
>antennas similar to a Rohn 45 section(s). That should help make it strong
>and stable and also avoid some interaction problems (maybe).

I've wanted to try something like this technique to adapt my 80 meter 4
square to 160.  I first was going to try to consider a multiple rosette like
you first suggested.  Then I ran MN(C) on an interference plot for what to
do with a 200 foot rotating tower in some reasonably close place to my 4
square 80 meter array..    Survey said, "And you just THOUGHT you could
put it WHERE?"  :)

Now I know we can broadband a dipole with multi-length stubs off the
center insulator, even make a multiband affair out of it if we suitably
fudge this and that..  We also can, I think, do this on a single vertical
element as in Hy-Gain's unit with stub elements off it...  but...

   if I contemplate what would happen to an array of these attempts to
   communicate with the rosetta stone...   my off hand bet, unchecked,
   is that the mutual coupling problem of the longer elements will
   seriously degrade the pattern on the others....

Time permitting, I was going to model this multi-element deal in another way.
I was going to attempt to extend the 80 meter element as a trapped deal,
with an extension at the top of the tower, and insulated section, as you will,

and continue up for 160 with a trap at the split point....

In theory, because the upper section is somewhat of a ghost, or might be,
to the 80 meter array on 80, just *MAYBE* I could have my cake and eat it
too....

Never having tried to make an 1/8th wave spacing 4 square work and fooling
with the negatives in the feed requirements, I wonder what I can or cannot
do to get a successful practical feed for the drives for the 4 elements on the

160 meter mode...

Then too, as Forrest Gerke has pointed out, just because I get a practical
application out of this shunt fed all grounded deal, that doesn't make it very

easy to model and understand from a theory point of view.  It may well be
that I have a practical application that works well enough to be of real value
,
but isn't very pretty or perfect in theory....

My point for you is two fold.  In your case, your wish to use a rosette in
full grounded shunt feed, each closely spaced element being gamma match
fed is beyond my practical experience to tell you that will work.  In the
case of the coil trap deal to extend an element, I was going to try to use
multiple gamma elements.  I was going to attempt to simply totally ground
out each one of the match sections not in use at the base and let them
serve only as just more tower sides of a sort in the multi-frequency test.
I think I know enough about the practice side of what you are talking about
to infer a useful result from the single band application..  If you even think

you will maybe try more than one element in phased applications, think
very carefully before pouring concrete on anything taller than the target
element length.   Pattern distortion from metal longer than your target
element is horrible.   You either put it *VERY* far away or have to
tune it out.   :)

Now for both of us, I have some advice on point number two.  Mikey here
is going to not model this thing in MN(C) which don't work very well for
the all grounded shunt fed vertical deal, but for *REAL* on a smaller test
version of his next creation on a dual band 10 meter and 20 meter setup.

If I can get a practical single element going on 10/20, then I will expand
the practical model to a two element array for test.

If the two element model works out, in practice, to be able to accept the
same phased feed scenario that I have long used in the other units I have
built in this discipline, I will then, and *ONLY* then, pour concrete.

Playing lawn dentist is *NOT* my idea of fun and certainly is worse than
fire ants on the lawn and about as financial fatal to your pocketbook as a
stray lawn dart to your favorite 'coon dog, Terry..

//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:48 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.myriad.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: rain static on dipole
Date: 29 Sep 1996 18:38:01 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <52mfm9$[e-mail]>
References: <52flv8$[e-mail]> <52latj$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup554.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <52latj$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (PTracy) writes:
>In article <52flv8$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
>
>>I get it all the time during the FROPA stuff here.  I can't disconnect as
>
>
>What is FROPA?

Aviation WX shorthand from the teletype forecasts and reports for pilots!

       Frontal Passage(s)

             :)

//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:49 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!hunter.premier.net!feed1.news.erols.com!news1.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!mr.net!news.netins.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Bob Lucas)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: AM Antennas
Date: 29 Sep 1996 20:06:07 GMT
Organization: INS Info Services, Des Moines, IA
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <52mkrf$[e-mail]>
References: <01bbae27$8e51be60$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: desm-10-61.dialup.netins.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.7

I have gone thru this, as many of the hams have. The simple solution
is to simply run as much wire as you can, as high as you can. Short
Wave listeners  begin with 66' and go longer from there. Your problem
is gionna be that you pull in SO MANY stations that your radio
overloads and you cant hearany OF THEM, UNLESS YOU HAVE A REALLY GOOD
RADIO.   wHAT RADIO ARE YOU USING??In article
<01bbae27$8e51be60$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] says...
>
>Hello all! Obviously I am new to the newsgroup.I am looking for some
info
>and maybe someone can help me.I live in an area where I can put up an
>antenna wherever I want however I want.The only exception is cost.What
I am
>looking for is how to build an AM antenna to pull in distant stations
well
>during the day as well as at night,If thats possible.Any directions to
info
>onn this would be appreciated. I have the antenna book that radio shack
>sells, but it doesnt have much info on AM antennas. Thank you .
>
>

>                Keith
>



From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:50 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.cableol.net!news-lond.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!hole.news.pipex.net!pipex!news.hiway.co.uk!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Plymouth Radio Club 1997 Rally
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 1996 22:28:21 GMT
Organization: HIWAY Internet Service Provider
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <52m108$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: plline5.avel.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Plymouth Radio Club holds its 1997 Rally on Sunday 25th May 1997 at
the College of Further Education Kings Road Devonport Plymouth.

The venue is excellent with lots of free car parking, a licensed bar
and restaurant.  There is plenty of space to browse and mingle.

Email me if you would like more information or want to book table
space.
--
Stephen G7UXL
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:51 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!castle.nando.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Paul Ferguson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Half Square on sloping lot?
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 01:38:13 GMT
Organization: Nando.net Public Access
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <52n8bn$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: grail1611.nando.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

I am interested in trying a half square for 40 meters like the one
described in CQ, Sept 1994.  The antenna is normally put over level
ground with the two vertical segments a few feet above ground. My lot
is narrow and sloping. If I keep the horizontal segment level I will
have a difference in elevation at the ends of about 15-20 feet.

Does anyone have any experience with half squares installed over
sloping ground? Is it better to let the horizontal segment slope to
keep the two vertical segments the same distance above ground?
What happens to the gain and pattern?

73 de,

Paul Ferguson
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:52 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!feed1.news.erols.com!news1.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!portal.gmu.edu!osf1.gmu.edu!wprice2
From: Bill Price <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2m from TV ant
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 1996 21:41:43 -0400
Organization: George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, USA
Lines: 60
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <52b40t$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: osf1.gmu.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>

On Sun, 29 Sep 1996, Joe B. Clark wrote:

> Clinton Peebles wrote:
> >=20
> > S>I am wondering if anyone ever took and old tv ant and made a decent 2=
m
> >  >out of it. I just recieved an old one from a neighbor and wanted to
> >  >cut it for 2m.
> >=20
> > Feb.1995 issue of 73 Amateur Radio Today has an article on page 46 on
> > making a dual-band yagi from old TV Antennas.
> >=20
> > Sept.1993 issue of 73 Amateur Radio Today has an article on page 34 on
> > making an 7 element 2m yagi from old TV Antennas.  I built this one 4 o=
r
> > 5 years ago and it's still working great.
> >      =C9=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=
=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=
=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=BB
> >      =BA    Clinton Peebles  VE7-KNL            Grid DN19ie   =BA
> >      =BA    SYSOP - Salmon Siding Saloon BBS - 604-357-9942   =BA
> >      =BA    Internet: [e-mail]               =BA
> >      =BA    Packet Radio: VE7KNL@VE7CW.#SEBC.BC.CAN.NOAM      =BA
> >      =C8=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=
=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=
=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=CD=BC
> > ---
> >  =FE QMPro 1.53 =FE Salmon Siding Saloon - Salmo B.C. [phone]
>=20
> GM, Clinton!
>=20
> Just thought I'd run this one by you. Been in hf for 33 yrs., and only
> recently(3yrs. ago) got into vhf, so I've tried quite a few antenna
> designs thru the years.
>=20
> If you have a log-periodic type tv antenna, you need do nothing more
> than match it to ur rig, either by an antenna tuner or balun! As u know
> 2m falls in the hole between channel 6-7, and the all channel type tv
> antennas work quite well on 2m.=20
>=20
> I've used the largest RadioShack vhf tv antenna with very good results.
> To the best of my calculations, I obtained about 10dbd with it. Also
> mounted it vertical and it worked quite well on distant repeaters 60-100
> miles out, but excelled when used horizontally on 2m sideband.
>=20
> Check it out. You'll be surprised. Good DX!
>=20
> 73 es bcnu,
>=20
> de Joe, WN5HMF, formerly kc5itc (finally got my first call back, thanks
> to 610V! hi, hi!)
>=20
>=20
...it's how lester cushman got started--well, actually it was the other=20
way around, but yes, you can do it.  it'd be easier though to buy a kit=20
from antennaco in (can't remember the town in nh) 'cause he's got all the=
=20
parts and the designs and his stuff is well made
-bp



From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:53 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-5.sprintlink.net!voskovec.radio.cz!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ais.net!eagle.ais.net!emarch
From: [e-mail] (Edward J. March Jr.)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF Mobile Antenna's for ICOM 706
Date: 30 Sep 1996 02:43:27 GMT
Organization: American Information Systems, Inc.
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <52nc4f$[e-mail]>
References: <4ut1tl$[e-mail]> <01bb8b05$3522efc0$f519369d@wokka> <4v2bt5$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eagle.ais.net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]


        I use the Spider mobil ant -- its the best ant i user used
        has slider to tune within the band -- i get exellent contacts
        and signals reports with it...

        I joking tell my wife we need a car in the back yard
        and a Spider nat on it since the car seem to almost
        outperform my Butternut vertical...

        Spider from MULTI Band Antenna  Canoga Park CA - 818-341-5460




--
        Best Regards,
        Ed

//---------------------------------------------------------------------
// Edward March Jr. ** Mt. Prospect, IL **>http://www.cl.ais.net/emarch
//
// Author of 'Professor Owl' the OS/2 C++ code generator.
// ***> http://www.BmtMicro.com/catalog/prof_owl.html
//
// IBM BestTeam OS/2 Member, Linux user, Ham call WB9RAA
//---------------------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:54 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.mindspring.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!scnews.sc.intel.com!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RV
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 1996 20:35:18 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbae36$41a7bec0$c21768ce@main>
NNTP-Posting-Host: camoore-desk.ch.intel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

Fine wrote:
> Building G5RV...... have conlficting info on matching......can I use LL or
> TL only if used w/tuner?  Any design variation would be appreciated.

Hi Gregg, unless you want to vary the length of the ladder-line per
band or do some cap/ind/stub matching on the ladder-line, you will
need an antenna tuner for all-band operation. The most efficient
approach is to forget the coax and bring the ladder-line all the
way to a balanced antenna tuner. But I don't know any reason why a
remote auto-tuner wouldn't work at the coax/ladder-line junction
of a G5RV.

73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:55 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.cableol.net!news.uoregon.edu!csulb.edu!news.sgi.com!enews.sgi.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!scnews.sc.intel.com!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Half Square on sloping lot?
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 1996 20:48:37 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <52n8bn$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: camoore-desk.ch.intel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

Paul Ferguson wrote:
> I am interested in trying a half square for 40 meters like the one
> described in CQ, Sept 1994.

Hi Paul, it is supposed to work well over a good ground. The wire
used in a "half-square" is the same one wavelength required for
a full-wave loop. A delta loop with one point straight down is
relatively ground independent and that is what I have chosen over
a half-square. EZNEC sez it's a pretty good 20m antenna also.

73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:56 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!raven.eva.net!usenet
From: "Dale (\"Squeak\") Porray, AD7K" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Source for push up masts
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 1996 22:24:40 -0700
Organization: Access Nevada Inc.
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp043.accessnv.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win95; I; 16bit)
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.equipment:32599 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24409

Kory Hamzeh wrote:
>
> I'm looking for sources for push masts. For reasons that I don't want
> to get into, I can not put up a tower. I just want to put up a Force-12
> C3 up about 30 feet with a Ham M or Ham 3 rotor. The mast will be in
> concrete at the base and bolted to the eve (sp?) of the house about 12
> feet up.  I'm hoping by doing this, I won't have to use guy cables. I'm
> not sure if I can get away with that.
>
> I know radio shack sells one, but I'm looking for other sources also.
>
> Any help would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> Kory
> AC6RN

Hi Kory ...

QST had a very good article about masts of this type within the last
couple years ... recommended reading!

The TV-type pushup masts are only designed for just that - TV antennas,
requiring small (read "light" rotators), and must be guyed every ten
feet, lest they attempt to geometrically resemble a snake trying to walk
erect! I would not recommend them for anything larger than a medium-sized
two meter beam or a small six meter beam (but not both), turned with a
small rotor, like to Phillips U-105! I definitely would **not** put one
up, unguyed (but roof-bracketed at 1/3 of its height above ground, with a
30 pound antenna with ten square feet or so of wind load, -and- a rotator
weighing twenty five pounds, and stand (or live) underneath it!!!

If you want an unguyed tubular mast, look at the U.S. Tower Company
MA-series products ... not gonna be $29.95 at the local R.S. store and
weigh 15 pounds - gonna be half-way to four figures, and weigh several
hundred pounds, and be made out of thick-wall steel tubing! But, it
-will- stay up in a windstorm and it -will- stay straight, and it -is-
designed for exactly what you are proposing to use it for!

Very 73,

"Squeak" Porray, AD7K
Manager, Amateur Electronic Supply/Las Vegas


From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:11:57 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!netnews.com!news.dx.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Doug D)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WTB Fiberglas rod or information on supplier
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 05:28:13 GMT
Organization: Doug's Personal Defense Products
Lines: 24
Distribution: World
Message-ID: <52nlli$[e-mail]>
References: <52m302$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: s16.lrbcg.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] wrote:

>I am building a 160 meter vertical and need a two foot piece of 5/8"
>solid fiberglas rod.  I have not been able to find a supplier. Does
>anyone know of one or have a piece of 5?8" rod for sale?
>Thanks,  Larry VE3WLN

United States Plastic Corp.
1390 Neubrecht Road
Lima OH 45801
1-800-537-9724
FAX - 419-228-5034

This company has every kind of plastic and fiberglas rod
known to man or beast. They also have a nice catalog.

Doug



--
Doug's Personal Defense Products
http://lrbcg.com/dougd/index.htm



From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:12:09 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-in2.uu.net!news.cyberg8t.com!host38.cyberg8t.com!user
From: [e-mail] (Raymond Sarrio)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Test your antenna knowledge->1st ham crossword puzzle now online
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 1996 23:26:21 -0700
Organization: Raymond Sarrio Co.
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <52aght$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: host38.cyberg8t.com

In article <52aght$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Brian
Williams) wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]>,
> [e-mail] says...
>
> >you will be able to try your hand at, the 1st ever, Ham Radio
> >Crossword Puzzle.
>
> Sorry, ham radio crossword puzzles have been published for at LEAST a
> year on packet.
>
> Brian

As I told you in your my e-mail this is the 1st ham radio interactive
crossword puzzle where you answer the puzzle questions on-line. If you
answer with the wrong answer the word is highlighted in red. This is a
1st----Nothing else like it is out there. Check it out for
yourself---Brain didn't before he attached his reply.
--
The Raymond Sarrio Co. a full feature Ham Radio Storefront and web site develo
per. Located at http://www.sarrio.com.

In association with Brillar Enterprises http://win-win.com/brillar provider of
 discount CD-Roms!



From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:12:10 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-5.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: wb4yuc
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WTB Fiberglas rod or information on supplier
Date: 30 Sep 1996 05:26:13 -0700
Organization: Zippo
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <52oe95$[e-mail]>
References: <52m302$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: webgate3.mot.com

In article <52m302$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>I am building a 160 meter vertical and need a two foot piece of 5/8"
>solid fiberglas rod.  I have not been able to find a supplier. Does
>anyone know of one or have a piece of 5?8" rod for sale?
>Thanks,  Larry VE3WLN
>
=============

Try These guys:

MAX GAIN SYSTEMS, INC.
221 Greencrest Court
Marietta, Georgia  30068-3825

PHONE: [phone]
April, 1995
(BEFORE 9PM EST)


5/8"               2.26 lbs.            8 ft.           Off-White
$12.00 each

73,

Bruce, WB4YUC


From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:12:11 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!news-in.iadfw.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (J. Fred Riley)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: rain static on dipole
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 10:11:59 -0500 (CDT)
Organization: INTERNET AMERICA
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <52onvv$[e-mail]>
References: <52gf8a$[e-mail]> <52hhpm$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dal29-18.ppp.iadfw.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.38

[e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:

>I'd worry about the fuse also. Fuses are...too slow for a FET.

But FET's make excellent fuse protectors



FRED

[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:12:12 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-in2.uu.net!news2.digex.net!news5.digex.net!haven.umd.edu!dailyplanet.wam.umd.edu!usenet
From: Wayne Shanks <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Dormitory 6m nightmare
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 12:40:29 -0400
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park, MD
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <52ilmr$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: css-b1-119.umd.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
To: Thomas N Tumino <[e-mail]>

Thomas N Tumino wrote:
>
> Fellow hams, I am a college student in a 10th floor single room that does
> not have any water pipes.  I can mount antennas a vertical steel sheet
> under my window, however I have yet to achieve an SWR of less than 1.9:1
> or so (with an ungrounded mfj tuner for six).
>
> I am trying to run my 2 to 6m transverter with 10w output..
>
> Any ideas for an antenna I can use?  Is it worthwile to ground my tuner to
> the third wire of the outlet?  Will that put any rf on my power line?
>
> Thanks for the help!
>
> Thomas N2YTF


You need a shorted quarter wave patch antenna, but it will be narrow
band +-1%, You could do some sort of log periodic patch array.  Do you
Have Math Cad.  I wrote a Mach cad program to calculate the parameters
for a shorted quarter wave patch antenna.  I used it to build a 2 meter
patch antenna that was 6 in wide, 19 inches long, and one inch thick.
I made it out of sheet metal I got from a hardware stoor.

Wayne S


From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:12:15 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!news.sgi.com!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!src.honeywell.com!The-Star.honeywell.com!bmw.hwcae.az.Honeywell.COM!usenet
From: [e-mail] (David Ellison)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Looking For 10db Attenuator for 2m/70cm
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 16:44:58 GMT
Organization: Honeywell, Air Transport Systems Division; Phoenix, AZ
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <52ot6l$[e-mail]>
References: <527rsq$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pcm753.ateng.az.honeywell.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

"Dale R. Parfitt" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Perry Lundquist wrote:
>>
>> I'm looking for a 10db attenuator useable with a dual band HT for 2m
>> and 70cm. I live in intermod hell and am searching for some relief. A
>> notch or band pass filter won't work because I would loose the use of
>> one band. In a recent QST article about intermod a mention was made
>> that because most of the time the unwanted signal is a third harmonic,
>> a 10 db attenuation of the wanted freq. will reduce the unwanted freq.
>> by 30 db. My thinking was that such a 10db attenuator coupled with a RF
>> actuated relay would be a possible solution. The RF relay would insure
>> that the circuit is inline only during receive. Any circuit suggestions
>> would be very much appreciated.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Perry - KB0WAJ

>Hi Perry,

>Our company, PAR electronics makes a series of notch filters that places
>a very deep notch @ 152-153 and yet has under 0.5 dB loss @ 2M and under
>0.25 dB loss @70cM. We were reviewed in the QST article but they failed
>to mention our larger mobile/fixed model OR the fact that our patented
>filters ARE entirely usable on dual band radios.
>Give us your snail-mail address and we will send you a brochure.
>A.E.S. and other major dealers handle our product.

>73,  Dale WA2YPY (W4SU if there is a vanity god!)
Could you please post PAR's address, please?

thanks in advance,

david ellison
not speaking for my employer.



From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:12:16 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!metro.atlanta.com!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!gatech!csulb.edu!news.sgi.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: "DAVE ABSHIRE" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WTB Fiberglas rod or information on supplier
Date: 30 Sep 1996 17:30:28 GMT
Organization: COMPUTER DIAGNOSTICS
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <01bbaef4$e17c65e0$6b5292cf@default>
References: <52m302$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.146.82.107
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

Cecil
Bandmaster has a complete selection of what you are looking for.
Try this address  http://bro.net/aae/fiber.html
Also there phone # is [phone]
                                                Dave


Cecil Moore <[e-mail]> wrote in article
<[e-mail]>...
> [e-mail] wrote:
> >
> > I am building a 160 meter vertical and need a two foot piece of 5/8"
> > solid fiberglas rod.  I have not been able to find a supplier.
>
> Hi Larry, Ryan Herco is in Seattle as well as Portland, San Jose,
> Anaheim, Tempe (AZ), Albuquerque, Austin, and Houston. They have
> a complete line of fiberglas products.
>
> 73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)
>


From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:12:17 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!ames!purdue!yuma!usenet
From: fiz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: goofy antenna question....
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 10:49:00 -0700
Organization: Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO  80523
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbae22$a30ed540$607cadce@ScandogPPP> <52m996$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rollers.physics.colostate.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)

Cecil Moore wrote:
>
> "Daryl McPhail" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >but I have a question about spacing and element length
> >what would be good ?
>
> Hi Daryl, this is not aimed at you personally but doesn't
> anyone open up a book anymore? A friend of mine asked a
> question on this newsgroup the other day. I told him the
> answer was in his ARRL Handbook. He said it was too much
> trouble to look it up. What the heck is going on?
>
> The ARRL Antenna Book has details on a 7-element 6m Yagi
> and a 25-element 440 Yagi which can be scaled to 6m.
>
> 73, Cecil, W6RCA

Now building a 25 element 6 meter yagi would be impressive. I've got a
13 element 2 meter yagi that measures ~17 feet long (built from the ARRL
Handbook plans? Works great). Some rough numbers I can't help but think
of would be x2 for 13->25 elements giving ~34 feet. Then x3 for 2
meters->6 meters giving a final length ~100 feet. An impressive antenna
indeed or am I a cup of joe short of being able to think clearly on a
Monday morning?

ttfn fiz (KG0YG)


From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:12:18 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.myriad.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: rain static on dipole
Date: 30 Sep 1996 17:50:18 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <52p18q$[e-mail]>
References: <52gf8a$[e-mail]> <52hhpm$[e-mail]> <52onvv$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup533.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <52onvv$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (J. Fred Riley) write
s:
>[e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
>
>>I'd worry about the fuse also. Fuses are...too slow for a FET.
>
>But FET's make excellent fuse protectors
>
>FRED  [e-mail]

   :) <chuckle>

//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:12:19 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news4.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!munnari.OZ.AU!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 5/8 wave design??
Date: 1 Oct 96 01:41:32 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]


<<
 Is there no one with the know how to  for desgning antennas like a
 simple 5/8 loading coil??

 Chris
  >>

Try the ARRL Antenna Book.

Bob
KD8WU


From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:12:20 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-penn.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news1.rad.net.id!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-11.sprintlink.net!news.whidbey.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (David M Schertzer)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: NEW 30-50mhz Antenna..
Date: 1 Oct 1996 02:42:09 GMT
Organization: DND
Lines: 13
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <52q0e1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: asn197.whidbey.net
X-Newsreader: News for Windows NT X1.0-92

*** NEW*** NEW***NEW*****
Antenna Specialist - ASPS593
Hi-Power, Cowl (fender) mount Disguise Antenna
30-50 mhz (low band)
Looks like a normal AM/FM car antenna
Original packaging + box
$50.00 shipped via UPS (CONUS) or
trade for anything you may have?

Oak Harbor, WA   USA
Ham Radio - VE7-LFA/W7
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Oct 03 14:12:21 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!howland.erols.net!EU.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!holmes.sgate.com!jekyll.sgate.com!donovanf
From: Frank Donovan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WTB Fiberglas rod or information on supplier
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 23:41:54 -0400
Organization: Southgate Internet Host
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <52m302$[e-mail]> <52mfv9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jekyll.sgate.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
To: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]
In-Reply-To: <52mfv9$[e-mail]>

Larry,
I'd suggest you try the USA's best mail order hardware store!  If you are
into building or maintaining towers or antennas (or about any other
application requiring sophisticated hardware), you can't beat them!

5/8" diameter Fiberglas Rod, 6 feet long, Stock Number 8543K67, $11.48.
My preference, however, would be 5/8" diameter Type LE phenolic,
4 feet long, Stock Number 8526K59, $19.52

Order from McMaster-Carr Supply company [phone] M-f 0700-2100
Eastern time, Visa and MasterCard payment accepted.  They normally ship
same day.

73!
Frank
W3LPL
[e-mail]

On 29 Sep 1996 [e-mail] wrote:

> In <52m302$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
> >I am building a 160 meter vertical and need a two foot piece of 5/8"
> >solid fiberglas rod.  I have not been able to find a supplier. Does
> >anyone know of one or have a piece of 5?8" rod for sale?
> >Thanks,  Larry VE3WLN