World of Ham Radio 1997/WOHR97_AmSoft_(1997-02-01).iso/usenets/1996_10/_antenna.txt

Text File | 1997-02-01 | 2MB | 44,150 lines

The World of Ham Radio CD-ROM



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:25 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!csulb.edu!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.magg.net!news
From: "Dale R. Parfitt" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Looking For 10db Attenuator for 2m/70cm
Date: Tue, 01 Oct 1996 00:44:25 -0400
Organization: PAR Electronics
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <527rsq$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <52ot6l$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wpb-115.magg.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win95; I)

David Ellison wrote:
>
> "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.


Hi David,

Thanks for the interest.

PAR Electronics
6869 Bayshore Drive
Lantana,  FL 33462


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:27 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news4.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!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: Kurt's rectangle
Date: 1 Oct 1996 00:45:30 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 39
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <52q7la$[e-mail]>
References: <52n8me$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Roy,

In article <52n8me$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Roy
Lewallen) writes:
>
>It might be as easy for you to test this antenna as to test the vertical
with
>radials. Care to give it a try?

What would be more important is to measure the effects of induction fields
on earth at various locations. We can confirm and de-bunk antennas at the
rate of one a week, and the job will be endless. As long as we don't
understand nearfield effects and earth, we'll keep inventing and
disagreeing about systems.

I'm thinking along the lines of building a small loop for 3.5 or 7 MHz,
and a small end loaded dipole with large hats or spheres at the ends.

If the change in Q of the loop is measured from a hundred feet or so in
the air to near the ground, and the change in Q of the dipole (when
vertically mounted near the earth) is meared under the same changes, I'm
wondering if we can't calculate the loss resistance attributed to the two
primary induction fields.

The little models I see (only in amateur books and articles) of little
capacitors that cause all the nearfield loss problems makes me wonder
where they come from. Are you aware of any research that indicates (so far
as induction fields) it is the electric field, and not the magnetic field,
that causes losses? I wonder if there is any rational behind the use of
that symbol, or if it's something that just popped up from nowhere.

I hope you see my point about the high electric field at the center of the
loop antenna, the magnetic field along the outer ends of the wires, and
the combination all along the system.

I suspect the rectangle antenna is as ground independent as a dipole at
the same mean height, and that is NOT very independent.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:27 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.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: goofy antenna question....
Date: 1 Oct 1996 00:53:13 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 17
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <52q83p$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

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

>
>I Think the best is to make 4 times 6 el and phase them together.
>
>SM0BKZ
>
>

Four yagis will make more gain in a smaller area over a wider bandwidth
and be easier to build than the real long yagi.

73 Tom





From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:28 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!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] (LarryP1217)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WTB crank up tower
Date: 1 Oct 1996 12:07:16 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 2
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <52rfjk$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (LarryP1217)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Want to but a crank up tower for my satellite antennas does not need to be
more than 30 feet ... thanks


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:29 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!in3.uu.net!news.structured.net!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx08-29
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Kurt's rectangle
Date: Tue, 01 Oct 96 16:42:43 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <52rhk4$[e-mail]>
References: <52n8me$[e-mail]> <52q7la$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx08-29.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <52q7la$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:

>. . .

>The little models I see (only in amateur books and articles) of little
>capacitors that cause all the nearfield loss problems makes me wonder
>where they come from. Are you aware of any research that indicates (so far
>as induction fields) it is the electric field, and not the magnetic field,
>that causes losses? I wonder if there is any rational behind the use of
>that symbol, or if it's something that just popped up from nowhere.

>. . .

No, I'm not, but that's not my field so there could easily be research I'm not

aware of. In his _Compendium_ (Vol. 2) article, Prack, K5RP, states, "Boyer
shows that the E component creates ground losses and that the H component is
virtually lossless" and references a series of two articles in _73_ by J.M.
Boyer titled "Surprising Miniature Low Band Antenna" (Parts I and II, 73, Aug.

and Sept. 1976). For me, this is worse than no reference at all -- _73_ is the

very last place I'd look for technical accuracy. And I suspect that the
referenced articles are the ones describing the DDRR, whose operation I believ
e
the author described incorrectly. Unless the _73_ article contains references
to
established texts, professional publications, or writings of authors I've come

to trust, I won't consider this to "proof" of any sort that the statement is
correct. That's at least one source of this conjecture. I'd be interested to
know if anyone out there can speak knowledgeably on the subject or could steer

us to some real references.

NEC does take into account the interaction of the near fields with the ground,

and comes up with an attractively low loss estimation for the low rectangle. I

don't entirely know why.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:30 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news4.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!news1.erols.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!qualcomm.com!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (A N Thompson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 6 mtr. antenna thoughts
Date: 1 Oct 96 17:04:45 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Re: horizontal vs. vertical polarization on 6m.  A major problem with
vertical polarization at your home station is mounting the antenna(s)
on your mast or tower.  To avoid disrupting the antenna pattern in a
vertical system, the supporting mast should ideally be non-conductive
in the vicinity of the antenna.  Creating a mechanically sound support
in that setting would be tough with even not-so-long boom antennas
on 6m, and a nightmare if you wanted to stack antennas in the vertical
plane.  Of  course, you could stack the antennas horizontally, but then
you would have the associated narrowing of your horizontal beamwidth
that you don't get with vertically stacked horizontally polarized
antennas.

I can think of a number of other reasons I should keep my 6m antennas
horizontal, but the mechanical considerations are enough.  For many of
us who have stacked 6m arrays, it would be much easier to sidemount
a 1/4-wave vertical somewhere on the tower than to convert our present
antennas to vertical polarization.

73,
Arliss


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:31 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news4.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx05-10
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Kurt's rectangle
Date: Tue, 01 Oct 96 21:47:32 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <52s3fk$[e-mail]>
References: <52ej41$[e-mail]> <52h0f1$[e-mail]> <52ivc1$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx05-10.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <[e-mail]>,
   Cecil Moore <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Roy Lewallen wrote:
>> The bottom of the loop was 5 feet from the ground,
>> and the top 16.5. The width of the loop was 30 feet. According to EZNEC, it

showed
>> 1.5 dB loss compared to two lossless 11.5 foot verticals driven in phase,..
.
>
>Hi Roy, With the bottom of the loop one foot above ground vs 20 ft above
>ground, EZNEC sez a 1.2dB difference. How would one go about actually
>measuring the difference since the TOAs are 5deg different? At 1deg TOA,
>EZNEC sez the difference is 3dB. That's human height 100yds away.
>
>73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)

The field strength could simply be measured at person height and compared with

ground wave analysis from NEC. When efficiency is the issue, ground wave and s
ky
wave analysis from NEC track just about perfectly, so any NEC inaccuracy shoul
d
show up in this analysis. I can do the ground wave analysis if anybody wants t
o
make some good measurements.

I don't have the results handy, but recall that the reported TOA for the loop
was lower than for the short verticals (but I recall only 2 deg. or so). Which

is stronger at 1 deg. elevation angle?

Roy Lewallen, W7EL



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:32 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news4.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx05-10
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 160 meter inverted L
Date: Tue, 01 Oct 96 21:49:19 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <52s3iu$[e-mail]>
References: <01bbafc4$f692fea0$f8e8fa8c@tonka>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx05-10.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <01bbafc4$f692fea0$f8e8fa8c@tonka>,
   "David Leduc" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>This past weekend I put up an 160 meter inverted L antenna. My first
>attempt at 160 meter operation.
>The vertical portion is approx 70 feet and the horizontal portion is approx
>55 feet in length. I have installed one 125 foot long elevated radial.
>According to articles that I have read by John, ON4UN, one or two elevated
>radials is sufficient. I have been able to work a few stations 500-600
>miles away Sunday and Monday evenings and
>I have received reports of 559 to 579. My problem is with the antennas
>ability to hear. I have a constant
>S3 to S5 noise level and can "hear" much better if I switch to my 40 meter
>delta loop when listening. The signals are weaker but the noise is
>substantially reduced.
>Any suggestions?
>
>Dave K1EPJ

Use the inverted L for transmitting and the delta loop for receiving.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:33 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news4.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!news1.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news.sgi.com!news1.good.net!news.good.net!news.goodnet.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Richard Dunmyer)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Helical wound antenna
Date: Tue, 01 Oct 1996 22:42:54 GMT
Organization: GoodNet
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <52s3ut$[e-mail]>
References: <52g4o2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: phx-ip-84.netzone.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Atsushi Otsuka) wrote:


>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

Well it has been a long time, but if I recall correctly the helical
vertical is actually a 1/2 wavelength of wire wound in a coil over a
fixed length....The ARRL antenna book has a couple of columns on this
type of antenna....The length of the pole it is wound on is not
terribly critical as I recall although the longer you can make it the
better....40 meter length of the pole was supposed to be about 7 feet
minimum...it is operated as a quarter wavelength and the SWR points
are pretty narrow as I recall...

A very very long time ago, in an ancient radio magazine which I cannot
recall whether it was QST or not, there was a design that some guy
made and used it inside his house...it was wound on lathe material and
had 1/2 wave wound on lathe which was about 1/4 inch thick and 2
inches wide, and about 15 inches long...he wound it for 15 meters and
he also wound 4 radials in the same manner....it worked ok....but then
I don't recall the year and it may have been a sunspot high back
then...
Illigitimi non carborundum



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:34 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!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.bc.net!news.mindlink.net!van-bc!n1van.istar!news.InterGate.BC.CA!usenet
From: jim stoller <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: highest gain 11 m antenna
Date: 1 Oct 1996 23:50:57 GMT
Organization: Internet Gateway Corporation
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <52sap1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm13s21.intergate.bc.ca
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: all

help i'm looking for the best design for a 11m antenna for my car or home
i know the 11m band is considered dead but it is still fun to play on and
i dont have a ham license as of yet. all the people i talk to gives me a
different opion on how to biuld a good antenna for my needs ...
   anyway thanks for your time



jim



           [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:35 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!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!van-bc!n1van.istar!news.InterGate.BC.CA!usenet
From: jim stoller <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: highest gain 11 m antenna
Date: 1 Oct 1996 23:52:20 GMT
Organization: Internet Gateway Corporation
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <52sark$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm13s21.intergate.bc.ca
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)

help i'm looking for the best design for a 11m antenna for my car or home
i know the 11m band is considered dead but it is still fun to play on and
i dont have a ham license as of yet. all the people i talk to gives me a
different opion on how to biuld a good antenna for my needs ...
   anyway thanks for your time



jim



           [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:35 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
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!news.eng.convex.com!arco!stalag_69.aai.arco.com!shuttd
From: Dean Shutt <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: VOACAP - voawin for Windows 95?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: 136.226.78.120
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-Xxmessage-Id: <AE7713DBCB014E78@stalag_69.aai.arco.com>
X-Xxdate: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 18:30:51 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Organization: Arco Alaska
X-Newsreader: Nuntius 2.0.1_68K
References: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 02:27:54 GMT
Lines: 1

Zip.  Worked the first time in Windows 95 for me.


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:36 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!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsserv.freeway.net!news2.netdtw.com!oxy.rust.net!usenet
From: "Richard G. Redoutey" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Birds on the Beam
Date: 2 Oct 1996 13:24:36 GMT
Organization: Rust Net - High Speed Internet in Detroit  810-642-2276
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <01bbb064$2e30f840$70c32ace@redoutey>
NNTP-Posting-Host: liv-12.rust.net
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

I'm looking for a solution ... I've had a problem with birds ( mostly
pigeons ) on the beam. They sit up there in large numbers, and leave a mess
on my patio, pool, and what else happens to be under the tower. Any SERIOUS
suggestions as how to keep them away would be appreciated. E-MAIL reply
would be best... [e-mail]
Rick - WA8UMT


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:37 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!news.sgi.com!enews.sgi.com!decwrl!tribune.usask.ca!rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!mongol.sasknet.sk.ca![e-mail]
From: Jim Hutchings <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: REQ: mods for Pro-29 scanner
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 1996 08:58:09 -0700
Organization: SaskNet News Distribution
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eagle46.sk.sympatico.ca
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E-SYMPA  (Win95; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] wrote:
>
> A friend of mine recently purchaed a Pro-29. He has been searcing for
> mods of any kind, but is unable to locate any. Does anyone know of any
> mods and/or where he might find them?
>
> Any info would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> Alex
> [e-mail] recently received a scanner modification handbook publ
ished by a
company in Winnipeg that lists mods for 14 "Pro" and 9 "Bearcat"
scanners.  I regret to say that the Pro-29 is not on the list. Maybe your
friend is out of luck.
Jim Hutchings VE5HM


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:38 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!ncar!csn!nntp-xfer-1.csn.net!csn!nntp-xfer-2.csn.net!symbios.com!southwind.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Wayne White)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Birds on the Beam
Date: 2 Oct 1996 18:51:13 GMT
Organization: SouthWind Internet Access, Inc.
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <52udj1$[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb064$2e30f840$70c32ace@redoutey>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eqa11.southwind.net
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.91.6

In article <01bbb064$2e30f840$70c32ace@redoutey>, "Richard G. Redoutey"
<[e-mail]> says:
>
>I'm looking for a solution ... I've had a problem with birds ( mostly
>pigeons ) on the beam. They sit up there in large numbers, and leave a
mess
>on my patio, pool, and what else happens to be under the tower. Any
SERIOUS
>suggestions as how to keep them away would be appreciated. E-MAIL reply
>would be best... [e-mail]
>Rick - WA8UMT


Perhaps a owl decoy on the mast would scare other birds away.

Just a thought.

Wayne


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:39 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!super.zippo.com!zdc!news.onramp.net!newshost.cyberramp.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: 9913  Max volts
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 1996 13:33:44 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <[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)

My Antenna Book doesn't give the Maximum RMS Operating Voltage
for 9913. Does anyone know it? A friend said 200v but that
sounds low for 1/2" coax.

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


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:40 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!torn!sis!halinet!ha153
From: [e-mail] (LEO GUIDOLIN)
Subject: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (USENET News System)
Nntp-Posting-Host: halinet.sheridanc.on.ca
Organization: Sheridan College, Ont., Canada
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 01:51:32 GMT
Lines: 10

Hello...

A friend of mine is an antenna experimenter and was thinking of putting
up a dipole for 20M cut to about 99 feet (3/2 wavelength). Can anyone
comment on the predicted performance if it's fed direct with coax at
about 35 feet off the ground?

73, de Leo VE3ZLG




From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:41 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!EU.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsgate.compuserve.com!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Birds on the Beam
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 1996 23:32:40 -0700
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb064$2e30f840$70c32ace@redoutey>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win16; I)

Richard G. Redoutey wrote:
>
> I'm looking for a solution ... I've had a problem with birds ( mostly
> pigeons ) on the beam. They sit up there in large numbers, and leave a mess
> on my patio, pool, and what else happens to be under the tower. Any SERIOUS
> suggestions as how to keep them away would be appreciated. E-MAIL reply
> would be best... [e-mail]
> Rick - WA8UMT________________________________________________________-
Fishing line or other nylon/dacron line < 1/16"
about 3 to 4 inches above the horizontal elements
and parallel to it .


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:42 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!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.myriad.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 40 meter antennas
Date: 3 Oct 1996 08:56:19 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <52vv3j$[e-mail]>
References: <52v057$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup594.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <52v057$[e-mail]>, kk5ep <[e-mail]> writes:
>Hello,
>
>I would like to erect a 40 meter beam beneath my tribander.
>What amount of spacing is required or adequate?  The tower will
>be 90-100 feet high.  My Tribander is a F12 C3.  The 40 meter
>beam will most probably be the Force 12 2 element monobander.
>If I mount the 40 mtr beam first, how high above it (in
>feet,please) should the C3 be mounted?  Thank you.  What do you
>antenna experts think about this installation and will it be a
>good one?  Suggestions, rebuffs, etc. all appreciated.  I'm
>learning mostly by trial & error, so I am not proud.  I this is
>not an installation that YOU would prefer, please tell me what
>you WOULD prefer if your goals were to have a Yagi on 40, 20,
>15, and 10.  I'm a serious Dxer and a fledgling "thinking hard
>about it" contester.  Tnx & 73, Mike  KK5EP.
>

Without going into the spacing bit, just a thought.  The cleanest pattern in
the 40 meter department is about 85 feet or so up.  Although the lobe angle
comes down as the beam goes up, that roughly 85 foot or 90 foot level is
attractive to me for that reason.  This height tensd top produce only one
major lobe off the beam with no spurious other lobes.  If you can be
satisfied with the take-off angle that height will produce on 40, mechanically

it should be easier than the other way around.

Stubbing a 40 meter rotary on a 20 foot pole above the other beams will
be a much tougher job, to say nothing about the work you will have to do
for thrust bearings etc., for it.


//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:43 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!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.myriad.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Birds on the Beam
Date: 3 Oct 1996 09:07:00 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <52vvnk$[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb064$2e30f840$70c32ace@redoutey>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup594.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <01bbb064$2e30f840$70c32ace@redoutey>, "Richard G. Redoutey" <redoutey@rust
.net> writes:
>I'm looking for a solution ... I've had a problem with birds ( mostly
>pigeons ) on the beam. They sit up there in large numbers, and leave a mess
>on my patio, pool, and what else happens to be under the tower. Any SERIOUS
>suggestions as how to keep them away would be appreciated. E-MAIL reply
>would be best... [e-mail]
>Rick - WA8UMT

The owl bit suggested seems to actually work somewhat.   The Catholic
Church here locally has used plastic owls for years to discourage other birds
from fouling the priests' quarters.

After I left Texas A&M's Oceanography Dept. a nice legacy of a full
commercial HF SSB research network years ago, they invested in one of the
Collins rotary log periodic arrays on about a 90 foot tower for it.  For a few

years now I have noticed that a for real owl has defined that beam as home,
despite what the FCC thinks about the field effects...

I can also tell you, that every time I've seen him/her up there, mighty few
other birds are around...   :)

The fouling lines above the elements are an interesting idea!   Not only that,

but you could actually get some anti-droop help from them, maybe.  I can
see that market slogan now, "Less droop and less poop!"

  :)

At Easterwood airport, long ago and far away, I remember you could buy bird
shot in 22 cases...., however that wouldn't be too swift for your beams...

You also could take up falconry as a second hobby...

//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:47 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.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: Kurt's rectangle
Date: 3 Oct 1996 11:24:12 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 87
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <530lqs$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Madjid,

In article <[e-mail]>, Madjid VE2GMI <[e-mail]>
writes:
>
>I have a poor copy (FAX) of the two articles from Boyer. They come from
>VE2DLJ and VE2AMT. They have build real DDRRs (not the chicken wire

These antennas have been "tested to death" Madjid. They do NOT work as
claimed, and have found their way into the class of antennas called
"inefficient radiators".

Antenna range tests have proven the DDRR is a very inefficient antenna.
Many years ago General Dynamics tested DDRR's, Hairpin Monopoles and other
antennas for the Military. DDRR's work like exactly what they are, very
short top loaded verticals. The perform at the same efficiency level as
any other top loaded vertical of the same height over the same size
ground. Almost all the radiation comes from the short vertical section.

The Military selected the Hairpin Monopole for shipboard use over antennas
like the DDRR because the hairpin monopoles were more efficient and
covered wider frequency ranges.

>You can hear Tony VE2DLJ almost every morning at sunrise around 06:30
>EST, in the 75 meters DX window working VKs, ZLs and yesterday a 3D2 with
his
>DDRRs and 500 Watts.

Today I worked VK6 (my 57) , 7J1 (my 58)  and ZL2 (my 57) with my mobile
on 80 meters. I have worked as far as Europe and VK on 160, where my
mobile antenna is less than 1% efficient.

I can work all over the world with my mobile, and actually BEAT many home
stations, yet I know the antenna efficiency is poor. When I run up against
a good station, I get beat 20 dB or more into DX. But that still leaves my
mobile with S9 plus signals that actually "beats many other DX antennas".

I could make up a big story about some "magic" going on, and I'm sure some
people would believe it. After all, I can beat some "big" antennas into DX
land.

>Despite the poor technical reputation of _73_ the articles by Boyer are
>very, I mean very technical, by any Ham magazine standards.

Technical is fine, but that doesn't mean accurate. "Snowing the reader" is
a skill commonly confused with technical expertise. When a reader doesn't
understand overly complex jargon he often assumes the author is "too smart
to be understood". That's why Amateur Radio publications are selected for
earth shaking revelations, there is little (or in the case of 73 "no")
technical review so the snow jobs slip by.

>Most RF losses in non-magnetic materials are caused by Dielectric
>losses.
>Magnetic field (Foucault currents etc...) can cause losses but only near
>metallic materials. Dirt and ground have almost no magnetic succeptance
>and can be considered transparent to Mag. Fields.

I would agree with that if my antenna spit out magnets, or had a fixed
value of charges piled up at the ends. But we are talking about RF. It is
the acceleration of charges that allows my antenna to affect charges in
the thin "no magnetic succeptance" ionosphere.

I turn on my transmitter and move charges in my antenna. Charges in the
ionosphere move and affect charges in the ground many hundreds and
thousands of miles away. Charges in the ground half way around the world
are moved by charges in the non-metallic ionosphere.

Charges in the ground move and excite the ionosphere again even further
away, and so on until it reaches an antenna. At the speed of light, this
effect ripples around the world. Now imagine an effect so powerful it
displaces charges all over the thinly ionized atmosphere, and again in
"dirt" thousands of miles away.

If we are to swallow some of these "lossless antenna" theories we have to
suddenly believe an antenna couples differently to the earth than the
ionosphere does, and the antenna only a few feet away from the dirt won't
displace any charges. Yet we KNOW the ionospheric charges moving hundreds
or thousands of miles away will move charges in the dirt!

We even know charges accelerating in antennas on earth can couple
(directly) to other planets and even other galaxies (given enough time)!

I guess we are supposed to think a varying magnetic field in dirt won't
displace charges ONLY in the dirt under the antenna, even if it does
displace charges in dirt thousands or hundreds of thousands of miles away.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:48 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.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: Kurt's rectangle
Date: 3 Oct 1996 11:24:29 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 52
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <530lrd$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader


Hi Kevin,

I'm glad you showed up.

In article <52sv37$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:

>I don't know anything specific about dirt, but unless it is full of
>iron, nickel or other magnetic compounds, I wouldn't expect it to have
>a permeability much different than air.  Assuming that is true, the
>loss mechanism is then primarily due to resistance to current flow or
>possibly dielectric losses.  This is presumably what is meant by
>"electric field losses."

Yet we know that the radiation near the antenna is always
electro-magnetic. While it is true we can have direct magnetic or
capacitive coupling, the effect would not decrese by distance^2 of a
simple field intensity or distance^3 for power in a given volume of dirt
until the field is beyond the near field region. We have a real mixture of
things going on.

Skin depth on 2 Mhz is 40 or 50 feet deep for poor soil, and we know the
effect at that distance from a long radial L>.2wl is still nearfield
(actually the deeper dirt is seeing displaced charges in the dirt above
it). That's why I cringe at the drawings of capacitors from antennas and
radials to ground. Somehow we have focused on one induction field only
(with the little capacitors, hi) and not the whole picture.

Because of that, I'm having a time deciding how to measure the effect of
dirt losses without a full sized antenna. I think I need various cubes of
dirt up to 100 feet across with all the typical changes we see in soil.

>NEC et al. use a model with the soil having a dielectric constant and a
>conductivity, or equivalently, a complex dielectric constant. I think
>that the assumptions of flat ground and a single dielectric
>constant/conductivity independent of position are much bigger
>approximations than mu=mu0. Actually, since there is very little extra
>work required to make mu complex, I presume it wasn't done in
>NEC etc. because normal soil is not appreciably magnetic.

That's the point that bothers me. We have to assume whoever solved the
problem did so correctly for all frequencies and ground types. Since I can
point out two or three things that disagree, something is compromised.

I'm not sure where this all started, and I can't find it in my textbooks.
All I see is the result, a bunch of little capacitors that don't represent
what actually physically happens.

Wher can I find data on field interactions with earth? Please don't draw
me a capacitor, we all know it's not that simple!

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:49 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news-penn.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-stkh.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!nntp-oslo.UNINETT.no!nntp-trd.UNINETT.no!nntp.uio.no!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.portal.ca!van-bc!unixg.ubc.ca!aurora.cs.athabascau.ca!news.mag-net.com!ve7tcp.ampr.org!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Dr.S.J.Roberts)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: (none)
Date: 3 Oct 96 20:08:09 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

unsubscribe [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:50 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.indy.net!news1.wtn.mci.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.campus.mci.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Phil Brown)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna construction resources on the WWW?
Date: Fri, 04 Oct 1996 00:25:25 GMT
Organization: CampusMCI
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <531lho$[e-mail]>
References: <53184l$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: s24-pm06.auburn.campus.mci.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Tony White) wrote:

>Anyone have a few bookmarks/links for good antenna construction resorces?

>Looking for stuff for 2m and a good general purpose 10-160 to be used with an

>antenna tuner.  All help appreciated.  Thanks.

Try http://www.qth.com/antenna/       for the "Antenna Elmer"

Good place to start.

73

==============================================================
Phil Brown                   [e-mail]
Amateur Radio N4COD
Video Producer/Instructor
www.tigerweb.com



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:51 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!nntp.crl.com!news.PBI.net!super.zippo.com!zdc!coopnews.coop.net!frii.com!usenet
From: Avatar <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Info QRP SWR brg ?
Date: Thu, 03 Oct 1996 18:08:16 -0700
Organization: Front Range Internet, Inc.
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftc-77.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)
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.equipment:32709 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24492 rec.radio.amateur.misc:107175

I'd like to get recommendations for a accurate, quality engineered SWR
bridge in the 1 to 5 watt range covering 1.8-30 MHz inclusive. It can be
assembled or kit. Please state model and manufacturer info where I can
get technical details.

my email: [e-mail]

Thanks in advance for your help.

73's
Dave
W0MAY



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:51 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!spool.mu.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.zeitgeist.net!wizard.pn.com!news.gte.com!news-in.tiac.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newshost.cyberramp.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Tony White)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna construction resources on the WWW?
Date: 4 Oct 1996 01:15:13 GMT
Organization: Digitrix Microsystems
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <531of1$[e-mail]>
References: <53184l$[e-mail]> <531lho$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dal-tsa1-p1-7.cyberramp.net
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.7

In article <531lho$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
>
>[e-mail] (Tony White) wrote:
>
>>Anyone have a few bookmarks/links for good antenna construction resorces?
>
>>Looking for stuff for 2m and a good general purpose 10-160 to be used with
an
>>antenna tuner.  All help appreciated.  Thanks.
>
>Try http://www.qth.com/antenna/       for the "Antenna Elmer"
>
>Good place to start.

Many thanks.



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:53 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.cdsnet.net!news.magicnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.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: Birds on the Beam
Date: 4 Oct 1996 02:18:08 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <531s50$[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb064$2e30f840$70c32ace@redoutey> <52vvnk$[e-mail]> <531hie$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr14s2.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <531hie$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Don Sterner) writes:
>In article <52vvnk$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>>
>>In <01bbb064$2e30f840$70c32ace@redoutey>, "Richard G. Redoutey"
><[e-mail]> writes:
>>>I'm looking for a solution ... I've had a problem with birds ( mostly
>>>pigeons ) on the beam. They sit up there in large numbers, and leave a mess
>>>on my patio, pool, and what else happens to be under the tower. Any SERIOUS
>>>suggestions as how to keep them away would be appreciated. E-MAIL reply
>>>would be best... [e-mail]
>>>Rick - WA8UMT
>>
>>The owl bit suggested seems to actually work somewhat.   The Catholic
>>Church here locally has used plastic owls for years to discourage other bird
s
>>from fouling the priests' quarters.
>>
>
>Somebody send me a telephoto lens and I can get you a photo any day
>of the week of hundreds of pidgeons sitting on a neighbor's roof along
>with FOUR of those big plastic owls.
>

Well, at least we now know it is not a universal solution...

    :)

From your suggestion I guess you would be making the observation that
whilist they might be squabbling, they are not squabbling over just any old
owl...        ?

//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:53 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!NEWS!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Russ)
Subject: Re: Help with Balun for multi-band Quad
Message-ID: <a37cc$153817.70@NEWS>
Date: Fri, 04 Oct 1996 02:49:47 GMT
References: <52v20p$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Lines: 30

[e-mail] (Paul Ferguson) wrote:

:>I am building a two-element quad for 20, 17,15, 12, and 10 meters.  I
:>plan to feed each driven element separately back to a switch box on
:>the boom. To  match the approximate impedance of the quad at 100 ohms,
:>I plan to use a 1/4 wavelength of 75 ohm coax from each driven element
:>to the switch box.
:>[SNIP SNIP}

:>I thought about putting a balun on the shack side of the switch box,
:>but I am not sure how effective this would be.

:>Can anyone offer suggestions?

Hi Paul, I went with the design in "ALL ABOUT CUBICAL QUAD ANTENNAS"
by W6SAI from the ARRL. I have a Tri-band 2 ele that I fed in the same
fashion you are talking about. Only at the feed point, I went with a
Gama Match system using #12 wire and some silver micas. It worked
very well and needed very little tuning to bring to the freq's I
wanted. It worked so well that I used it 3 feet off the ground for
some time. When I put it up at 65 feet the swr went to nill all the
way across 20 & 15. On 10 meters it would go from the low end up to
about 29.200.


73
de N5EJS
Russ





From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:54 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.direct.ca!nntp.portal.ca!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 with balun for multi-band quad"
Date: 4 Oct 96 03:46:45 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

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


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:55 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.asu.edu!atkes
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Kurt's rectangle
Date: 4 Oct 1996 06:54:48 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 73
Message-ID: <532cbo$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <530lrd$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: general5.asu.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

W8JI  Tom ([e-mail]) wrote:

Hi Tom,

>Yet we know that the radiation near the antenna is always
>electro-magnetic. While it is true we can have direct magnetic or
>capacitive coupling, the effect would not decrese by distance^2 of a
>simple field intensity or distance^3 for power in a given volume of dirt
>until the field is beyond the near field region. We have a real mixture of
>things going on.

I completely agree. My point was only that the loss is from moving
charges in the dirt rather than flipping magnetic moments.
If we put a piece of copper in a coil, the Q is lowered. The
main loss mechanism is that there are currents induced in the copper,
and the losses from the resistance in copper decreases the Q.
The induced current is just sigma E. The E is the total
electric field from all the currents both in the antenna
and the ground, and isn't easy to calculate. I presumed this is
what is meant by "electric field losses." If we put a ferrite in
the coil, the magnetic field will tend to flip the magnetic
moments in the ferrite. The "friction" in this flipping will
give an additional loss. This could be described by a complex
permeability, and is presumably "magnetic field loss."
I was only commenting that the resistive mechanism as opposed
to the magnetic moment flipping mechanism is the dominant
one in dirt unless something strange is going on.

>Skin depth on 2 Mhz is 40 or 50 feet deep for poor soil, and we know the
>effect at that distance from a long radial L>.2wl is still nearfield
>(actually the deeper dirt is seeing displaced charges in the dirt above
>it). That's why I cringe at the drawings of capacitors from antennas and
>radials to ground. Somehow we have focused on one induction field only
>(with the little capacitors, hi) and not the whole picture.

All this is true, and I too have never understood these capacitor
models for poor ground.

>That's the point that bothers me. We have to assume whoever solved the
>problem did so correctly for all frequencies and ground types. Since I can
>point out two or three things that disagree, something is compromised.

To the extent that the ground can be described as having a dielectric
constant and a conductivity, is perfectly homogeneous, and is perfectly
flat, NEC correctly (unless there are coding bugs) solves Maxwell's
equations in the same thin wire approximation it makes in free space.
The only difference is that is uses precomputed tables to look up the
effect of the conductive ground. There could be interpolation errors
in these tables, but that can be addressed by making more table points.

You actually don't have to assume, you can take the fields that are
produced and check whether they are consistent with Maxwell's equations
by taking the appropriate derivatives numerically, and checking
numerically that the fields at the boundaries properly match.  I have
thought about coding up some simple cases to make sure that I get the
same results predicted by NEC, but it is among the many things I will
do later :-).

>Wher can I find data on field interactions with earth? Please don't draw
>me a capacitor, we all know it's not that simple!

I am not sure what you want. Do you want actual measurements, or
the physical mechanism? My assumption is that a good model would
be ground with a dielectric "constant" and conductivity that
depend on position. Measuring these parameters over a wide
area and to the required depth and then calculating the result
(particularly the former) would be very hard. Before trying that,
I would first make sure that I was using the appropriate average parameters
for my location. You might try finding the height of minimum
resistance for a resonant dipole and adjust the parameters
to make sure that agrees with the models.

73 Kevin [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:56 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.deltanet.com!usenet
From: Jerry Brock <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Force 12 Yagi's Opinions??
Date: Fri, 04 Oct 1996 01:24:31 -0700
Organization: Brock's Business Services
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rvr0156.deltanet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; U)

Am considering buying a Force 12, C3 or C4 Tri-band yagi to
replace a Mosley TA-33 Tri-bander.
Would appreciate comments good or bad on  Force 12 antenna's.
Thanx
Jerry
--
Jerry & Pat Brock
Amateur Radio Address KN6JK or KC6LCL@w6tj.#soca.ca.usa.noam


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:57 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.voicenet.com!netaxs.com!news.misty.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.portal.ca!van-bc!unixg.ubc.ca!aurora.cs.athabascau.ca!news.mag-net.com!ve7tcp.ampr.org!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Daniel F. Stiles)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Free-Space Dipole Matching
Date: 4 Oct 96 12:37:19 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]


          Jason wrote about the dipole mismatch when using a
          commercial FM Station with no noticable effect.

          Seems to me you are correct in all your theory you
          relate and the math.

          Problem is conclusion - with power levals from
          Commercial broadcast station and distance 17 miles
          (although you did not state what the terrain is
          like), it is unlikely you would see a noticeable
          effect unless using calibrated test equipment.

          From the way you describe your antenna, there is
          indeed a four to one mismatch.  But, it may
          simply not matter because the signal strength
          reaching your rcvr is still so far above the
          minimum needed for full quieting FM stereo
          reception.

          If you want to experiment without test equipment,
          find a weak station and conduct your experiment
          and I'll bet you will see a difference.

          Have fun
          Dan KB1BG



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:58 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!news.physics.uiowa.edu!news.uiowa.edu!news
From: "William E. Sabin" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Birds on the Beam
Date: Fri, 04 Oct 1996 08:15:58 -0700
Organization: none
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb064$2e30f840$70c32ace@redoutey> <52vvnk$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-102.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)

Ian White, G3SEK wrote:
>

> I'm still trying to figure out whether that first bird is very smart,
> or very stupid.
>

It's the classic Darwinian evolutionary English bird that eventually
triumphs (finds a mate). A survivor, like Ian.

Bill W0IYH


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:59 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!enews.sgi.com!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!news1.tele.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: Antenna for 15m?
Date: Fri, 04 Oct 1996 08:27:16 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup99-3-6.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)
To: Brian Short <[e-mail]>

Brian Short wrote:
>
> Do some HF contesting with 2 radios, but only
> have a single tri-band yagi for 10/15/20.
>
> During daylight hours, this effectively limits
> to one radio.  10m is not very useful presently,
> so my thought is to erect something for 15m.
>
> Another yagi is an unlikely solution due to my
> city location, but would like to hear other ideas
> for a decent 15m antenna which requires no tuner.
>
> Any ideas?  [e-mail]


Try any multiband GP, would give you multiple choise.

SM0BKZ


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:24:59 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!enews.sgi.com!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!news1.tele.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: INFO : 2meter antenna DX
Date: Fri, 04 Oct 1996 08:30:46 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup99-3-6.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)
To: Susan Driggers <[e-mail]>

Susan Driggers wrote:
>
> I am looking for info on building a 2 meter antenna that would allow me
> to use a Radio Shack (no jokes plese) handheld 5w transceiver to contact
> anything .. :> Thanks.

The transceiver is probably FM only, or ??? Normally you use vertical
polarisation so why mot make a small 1/4 lamba vertical. Any antenna
handbook gives you more details.

SM0BKZ


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:01 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.voicenet.com!netaxs.com!news.misty.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.portal.ca!van-bc!unixg.ubc.ca!aurora.cs.athabascau.ca!news.mag-net.com!ve7tcp.ampr.org!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Mark K Flanagan)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Shortwave listebing, pirates, etc.
Date: 4 Oct 96 15:45:08 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

In response to:
>>
>>can anyone tell some good sw frequencies to listen to?
>>such as pirate radio,etc.....
>>
>>i was told there is some neat stuff on there but i can`t seem to find
>
>>some of it>         your  suggestions are much appreciated.
>>
>>                    later
>>                           N3TVV
>
I remember reading about unidentified transmitters in a magazine
publication sold
at Radio Shack.  These are regular transmissions of a coded nature most
likely linked to Embassies and the State Department.  I checked out a
couple and they sounded like beacons.  Pick up the magazine, its geared
towards SWL and Scanner buffs, I believe it regularly lists frequencies
of interest.

NOTE: Please limit questions on this mailing list to antennas.  I have
had to cancel my subscriptions to other mailing lists because they were
loaded with messages off
of the subject.  I would hate to ruin such a useful mailing list.

73 de [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:02 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: Birds on the Beam
Date: 4 Oct 1996 16:14:48 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <533d5o$[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb064$2e30f840$70c32ace@redoutey> <52vvnk$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr13s8.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <[e-mail]>, "William E. Sabin" <sabinw@crpl
.cedar-rapids.lib.ia.us> writes:
>Ian White, G3SEK wrote:
>>
>
>> I'm still trying to figure out whether that first bird is very smart,
>> or very stupid.
>>
>
>It's the classic Darwinian evolutionary English bird that eventually
>triumphs (finds a mate). A survivor, like Ian.
>
>Bill W0IYH

Does that mean it's an anglican or is just eventually just consigned a
British motorcycle for life, or, shudder, maybe both?

    ;)

//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:03 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!news.inc.net!newspump.sol.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: Large coax loop for tropical DX question
Date: 4 Oct 1996 16:32:48 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <533e7g$[e-mail]>
References: <palln.844434457@hubcap>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr13s8.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <palln.844434457@hubcap>, [e-mail] (Phillip Allen) writes:
>I spend a lot of time trying to dig weak Peruvian tropical band DX signals
>out of the air. I built a very long dipole( about 100m) but it is only about
>20 feet high and picks up a lot of noise, even though it is fed with coax.

>I have two 100 foot long pieces of coax, and I was thinking about a large
>coax loop antenna. It would not have to be rotated, I am only interested in
>signals directly south of my qth. A big loop on the south side of my house
>would also be somewhat shielded from the power lines on the other side.
>Does anyone have an Ideaabout a simple way to accomplish this?  A beverage
>antenna is not an option.

>I do know about the ham antenna handbook, but I am hoping to find someone
>who has Ideas for specifically tropical band DX.

Phil in SC, two thoughts!  First on the loop itself.  In the library there at
the university, I am pretty sure they will have an archive of QST.  Several
years back, there was an article in QST on operating an array of loops in
echelon.  These were all relatively small loops, only about six feet or so in
diameter and were properly oriented and connected with the proper phase
length coax cable to make four of them an array, I think I recall.

Your comment about using the actual coax as the coil itself is unique to me.
That might be one way to get a shielded loop I never thought about.  I've
also now been forced to consider what effect might be controlling for a
multi-turn smaller creature like this, say 6 feet in diameter?

Of course all this stuff is weak signal output, thus a pre-amp is likely in
order, but it might both provide bi-directional response perpendicular to the
plane of the loop, single or multi-turn.

The part of your question that also is important is, what frequency are you
going to be monitoring?  If all this is within only those frequencies in which

a beam isn't too large, you may be time and money ahead to simply build
a small beam antenna, particularly a small quad, or even the folded element
version of it known as a Swiss Quad.  In that one, the outer dimensions of
it are only 1/8 wavelength lomg, pretty small at some frequencies.  You did
not specify if only one narrow band of frequencies is involved, or a wide
general range of them!

//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:04 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.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: Rotator Information Needed
Date: 4 Oct 1996 16:36:09 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <533edp$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr13s8.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <[e-mail]>, Ed Sikorski <[e-mail]-link.n
et> writes:
>Could anyone tell me where I could purchase a ring rotator.  I want to
>side mount an antenna on one of the lower sections of my tower and I
>want the ability to rotate it.
>
>thanks
>
>ed AA8PA

A firm that builds them has advertised repeatedly in QST that I recall.

Not only that, I think they are a Michigan outfit, but that's only memory.
You might be able to run right in and pick it up in person from your call
sign suggested location, if they are still in business..


//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:05 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.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!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!ifwtech.demon.co.uk!G3SEK
From: "Ian White, G3SEK" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Birds on the Beam
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 20:22:54 +0100
Organization: IFW Technical Services
Lines: 17
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <wPqh6HAOQWVyEw$[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb064$2e30f840$70c32ace@redoutey> <52vvnk$[e-mail]>
 <[e-mail]>
 <[e-mail]> <533d5o$[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 3.00 <9qI82xurdT5+zee3Wovwfh3yMs>

>>Ian White, G3SEK wrote:
>>
>>> I'm still trying to figure out whether that first bird is very smart,
>>> or very stupid.
To which Bill Sabin replied:
>>It's the classic Darwinian evolutionary English bird that eventually
>>triumphs (finds a mate). A survivor, like Ian.
And Mike Luther added:
>Does that mean it's an anglican or is just eventually just consigned a
>British motorcycle for life, or, shudder, maybe both?
>

Thinks...  (Should I tell them that the mate I found is an American?)
           (Should I tell them how?)
           (No, they probably couldn't handle it.)

73 from Ian G3SEK


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:05 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!coopnews.coop.net!csnews!boulder!csn!nntp-xfer-1.csn.net!news.acsu.buffalo.edu!dsinc!spool.mu.edu!newspump.sol.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sgi.com!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz.cv.hp.com!news
From: Marty Gulseth <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 9913  Max volts
Date: Fri, 04 Oct 1996 13:27:05 -0700
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Spokane Division
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpspkwt.spk.hp.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win16; I)
To: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>

Cecil Moore wrote:
>
> My Antenna Book doesn't give the Maximum RMS Operating Voltage
> for 9913. Does anyone know it? A friend said 200v but that
> sounds low for 1/2" coax.
>
> thanks and 73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)

Hi Cecil,

Please post any responses not posted publicly. Thanks!

Marty - W7LEJ


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:06 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!nntp2.cerf.net!hacgate2.hac.com!news.delcoelect.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Paul J. Dobosz)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: shortwave listening
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 1996 00:00:45 GMT
Organization: Delco Electronics Corp.
Lines: 18
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <5341bo$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <532d82$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: repc5015.rey.delcoelect.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.46

Not true ... There has been a lot of pirate activity every weekend on
6955 KHz with multiple pitrates operating over the course of the
weekend.  SW pirates are very much alive and well.  You obiously don't
know where to look or don't listen to Pirate SW.


[e-mail](Anthony Severdia) wrote:


>    Pirate SW radio is non-existent now.  Why the interest in "pirate"?

>    Pirate FM is the hot thing right now.  You may have some in your
>area,
>depending on how anarchistic your population is.  These are usually
>less than 1 watt and aimed at immediate locale (city districts).  These
>come and go at a whim for lack of audience.




From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:07 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!news-f.computek.net!news-in.iadfw.net!news.sesqui.net!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.ums.edu!haven.umd.edu!ames!enews.sgi.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.datalytics.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-8.sprintlink.net!eskimo!news
From: [e-mail] (Bill Turner)
Subject: Re: Quad Spreaders...
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: wrt.ndip.eskimo.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News User Id)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: Eskimo North (206) For-Ever
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/16.299
References: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 00:21:34 GMT
Lines: 20

Howard Wick <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Has anyone ever used PVC pipe for a hf Quad Ant? If so, How did they
>work?
---------------------------------------------
I used PVC once not for a quad, but for a 33-foot vertical.  It was much
lighter than a metal mast and I just hung a piece of wire inside it for the
conductor.  Two things were of interest which you might want to consider about
your quad.  One was that the PVC expanded when the sunlight hit it, but only
on the lighted side.  The result was that the top leaned three or four feet
north of the bottom.  Didn't hurt anything, but sure looked funny.  The other
was that PVC is very bendy.  I had it guyed at two levels and it looked pretty
secure, but during the 1992 Inauguration Day storm here in Seattle, it set up
a resonant kind of oscillation and eventually shattered into a dozen pieces.
Made quite a noise coming down on top of the roof.

Just some things to think about.

73, Bill W7LZP
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:08 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news-penn.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: Kurt's rectangle
Date: 4 Oct 1996 23:33:45 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 18
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <534kup$[e-mail]>
References: <530cfe$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <530cfe$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dan Richardson) writes:

>
>None of these came close to the 1005/f  formula given by Kurt and
>others for loops.
>
>According to Kurt's article he built the loop and installed it 1/4
>wave above ground and the resonate frequency was at 14.142 MHz.
>(1004.9/f).
>
>Danny, K6MHE

Hi Danny,

It seems reasonable the formula would change as the geometry or height of
the loop is changed, doesn't it?

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:09 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.magicnet.net!iag.net!news.misty.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news3.cac.psu.edu!news.cse.psu.edu!news.cc.swarthmore.edu!netnews.upenn.edu!news.enter.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (bob puharic)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need info on screwdriver antennas
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 1996 04:26:02 GMT
Organization: ENTER.NET
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <533vdb$[e-mail]>
References: <01bbafba$77ee3ba0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm2-20.enter.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

"Raymond Jeffus" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>I'm trying to find out from anyone that may have any  experience with the
>HS1000 from High Sierra or the BB3 from TJ Antennas.

>Your thoughts on quality, ease of use and durability would be appreciated.

Ive had my BB3 for about 2 weeks now. Went on fairly well (chevy
blazer), with the help of a mount mfg'd by a friend. Another friend
and i were working EI2CV last week...he had a ham stick, i had the
bb3. he got a 53 i got a 56. big difference. have had no problems
working cape verde islands (53) oklahoma city (20 over 9), CA, and
brazil.

It's very easy to match from inside the car...which is one reason i
bot it...also read an article in cq about a comparison between
hustlers, bb3 and bug catchers. Catcher was better over the bb3 by abt
1 db. the bb3 and catcher beat the hustler by about 10 db.

Only liability: TJ antennas got a bad lot of toroids from their
supplier. mine blew about 10 minutes after i started using
antenna...can still use it on 20 meters and above but not on 40 or
80...got the new toroid today.



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:10 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.asu.edu!aztec.asu.edu!hamop
From: [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Kurt's rectangle
Date: 5 Oct 1996 04:52:08 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <534pho$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aztec.asu.edu


Brian Farelley reports that
Cecil Moore wrote:
>
> 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.

        Thaat's why J C Maxwell invented the concept of
displacement currents

Charlie, W7XC
--


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:10 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!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!excelsior.flash.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jim)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Req: PRO-23
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 1996 05:00:52 GMT
Organization: Flash-Net Internet Service Provider, 888-FLASHNET
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: opm1-94.flash.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99d/16.182

If anyone has any mods for the PRO-23 please let me know.  Thanks in
advance.


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:12 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.asu.edu!aztec.asu.edu!hamop
From: [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Kurt's rectangle
Date: 5 Oct 1996 05:22:19 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 73
Message-ID: <534rab$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aztec.asu.edu


[e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:

>. . .

>The little models I see (only in amateur books and articles) of little
>capacitors that cause all the nearfield loss problems makes me wonder
>where they come from. Are you aware of any research that indicates (so far
>as induction fields) it is the electric field, and not the magnetic field,
>that causes losses? I wonder if there is any rational behind the use of
>that symbol, or if it's something that just popped up from nowhere.

        These simplistic illustrations are about on the same
level of fact as an illustration I saw in the first radio book
I found in the librtary when I was a boy.  It was dated 1915
and showed two towers, one transmitting, the other receiving,
connected by a dotted line in the sky with a sort of virtual
capacitor in series beteen the tops of the towers with the ground
as the return circuit.
        There are five fields associated with a small dipole.  Three of
them are electrical and two magnetic.
        The Radiating Field consists of one electric and one magnetic
field in space qradruature both perpendicular to the radius from the
dipole and maximum at 90 degrees from
the axis of the dipole.  They both drop in amplitude as the square of
the distance.  The Radiating Field departs from the dipole never to
return.  A portion of the Radiating Field is lost in the earth from
which it reflects to join with the direct field to produce the field
pattern.
         The Local Induction Field consists of an
electric field and a magnetic field in space quadrature both
perpendular to the radius from the dipole and maximum at 90
degees from the axis of the dipole but dropping in amplitude as the
square of the distance.  Unlike the Radiating Field, they go out from
the dipole then collapse back on it with each half cycle.
        The last field is the so-called Electrostatic Field maximum
along the axis of the dipole in a radial direction and dropping in
amplitude as the cube of the distance.  It is the varying AC field
corresponding to the field that would exist were the source DC.
        Consider the Local Induction fields as
coupling between the dipole and the earth acting SOMETHING
LIKE (i.e. not to be taken literally) the coupling between the
primary and secondary of a transformer with the dipole as the
primary and every "patch" of earth as a secondary.  The losses
incurred in iteraction wih the earth then appear as Loss Resistance
when these fields collapse back to the dipole on each cycle.  In
their interaction with the earth either the magntic field OR the
electric field may be used to calculate the ensuing loss.  The
magnetic field immediately above the earth makes a convenient
measure of the current flowing in the earth and is generally used.
This is the method of GH Brown in his Doctorial Thesis and in his
classical paper with Louis and Epstein on Earth Loss.  These papers
treated both the Local Induction Field loss of the vertically polarized
component from the vertcal portion of the antenna and the
horizontally polarized component from the top load wire.
     Except for the calculation of current distribution between the
earth and the radials in a vertical antenna, little has changed in
calculation of earth loss by more recent texts.
     Earth has a complex dielectric constant that is a function of
frequency and earh characteristics.  Mu is generally assumed as Mu
of free space.  The earth acts as a leaky capacitor and the current in
it bears a phase difference from that in the radials.  I believe the
primary failure of Brown's experimental work to agree with
theoretical predictions when few radials are used (See the Brown,
Lewis, Epstein paper) is primarily due to failure of the method
calculating ratio of earth to radial current when few radials are used
and possibly somewhat due to "earth entry losses" negligible when
high numbers of radials are used but perhaps significant when few
are used.
     I have written a BASIC program that reproduces their results.  I
pulled a paper submitted to QST upon realization of this situation.
Charlie, W7XC
--


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:13 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.zeitgeist.net!wizard.pn.com!news.gte.com!news-in.tiac.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: "DAVE ABSHIRE" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Anyone ever use a utility pole for a tower?
Date: 5 Oct 1996 06:21:05 GMT
Organization: COMPUTER DIAGNOSTICS
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <01bbb285$133d4e80$944692cf@default>
References: <533tvs$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 148.orlando-007.fl.dial-access.att.net
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

Hi Phil
I use three of them now. I have two 70 footers and a 35 foot one. But I use
the 35 footer to raise and lower the 70ft tower. Man thats a lot of money
for a pole. I got mine for $60.00 each for the 70's and 20 for the 35ft
one. But then again I guess it depends on where you are. I live in Florida
and there seemed to be a lot of them in my area 2 years ago. These are used
though. But its still cheaper than buying a tower or two. I think the
prices you were quoted are very high. I set these poles myself with a
backhoe and a old ford 8n tractor if you know what that is, (1948) model.

                                                        Dave
> I want to get a wooden utility pole to use as an
> antenna tower.  Seems to me it could be a good deal
> stronger than the typical steel ham tower. Could have
> a micro-shack right up there.
>
> Has anyone ever done this?
> Any good advice?
>
> I've been quoted prices in the $250 to $1100 range,
> (which prices naturally do not include shipping or installation!)
> so that's reasonable.
>
>
> What say you?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Phil Roban n0etx



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:14 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!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!sun.sirius.com!usenet
From: "Lonnie Domnitz" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: For Sale:  Antennas and other stuff
Date: 5 Oct 1996 07:32:31 GMT
Organization: Computer Maniac
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <01bbb28f$b8fe94a0$dfe386cd@polaris>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp223-sf1.sirius.com
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

TOO MANY TO LIST HERE, Please take a look at my web site:
www.sirius.com/~maniac for the complete list

This list is updated daily since stuff is moving fast and I am adding
general electronic parts and equipment.

I have antennas, some homebrew and Heathkits and other commercial gear



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:15 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news-dc.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-paris.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-stkh.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-penn.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.sgi.com!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!news
From: [e-mail] (W6KKT Jesse)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Question on HAMSTICK
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 1996 13:42:56 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 20
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <533anu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dyn4.frazmtn.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/16.227

On 4 Oct 1996 15:33:18 GMT, [e-mail] (Frank Sved)
wrote:

>
>A friend told me he uses a ham stick and it works well.
>
>It is a fiberglass section with a metal whip on top.  Whip is ajustable
>for tuning.  Fiberglass section is loaded I believe.
>
>The base is a threaded 3/4" stud.
>
>Are these really any good for 80m?
>--
>
>
>  Bye for now, Frank Sved (VE3GID) at [e-mail]

Hi Frank,  The "Hamstick" on 75 meters is about 10db down from a 1l'
center loaded "hi Q" coil setup (Bugcatcher type).
73, lJesse W6KKT


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:15 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!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: Transmission lines as circuit element
Date: 5 Oct 1996 13:17:09 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 10
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <53656l$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (THamm40820)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hi,
   In lots of antenna applications, a section of transmission line is used
to serve as a capacitor or inductor.  Are these pieces of line better or
worse to use than actual real capacitors and inductors ?  Do they have
better Q ?  Do they have lower or higher loss ?  What are the overall
advantages and disadvantages ?
   Your replies are appreciated.

Tommy
KI7KH


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:16 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news-dc.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-stock.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-penn.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-stkh.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!nntp-oslo.UNINETT.no!nntp-trd.UNINETT.no!online.no!sn.no!nntp.uio.no!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] (THamm40820)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Capacitance/inductance per foot of xmission lines
Date: 5 Oct 1996 13:26:39 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 11
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <5365of$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (THamm40820)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hi,

   In the antenna books I have, data for capacitance per foot of various
kinds of coax transmission lines is shown, but not twin lead varieties.
Would someone out there please post specs for twin lead data.
Specifically, I would like to know about 300 ohm TV twin lead and 450 ohm
ladder (window) line.  Also, since capacitance per foot is noted (for
coax), why isn't inductance per foot also noted ?  Thanks for the info

Tommy
KI7KH


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:17 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.orst.edu!news.BSDI.COM!bad-news.harborcom.net!li.net!bbruhns
From: [e-mail] (Bob Bruhns)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Anyone ever use a utility pole for a tower?
Date: 5 Oct 1996 17:46:54 GMT
Organization: LI Net (Long Island Network)
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <5366uf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: linet01.li.net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]


Phil Roban ([e-mail]) wrote:
: I want to get a wooden utility pole to use as an
: antenna tower. ...Has anyone ever done this?  Any good advice?
: I've been quoted prices in the $250 to $1100 range,
: (which prices naturally do not include shipping or installation!)

  Phil, from what I hear, the transportation costs are the problem.
Poles can not be dismantled for shipment, and that stops most of us
little guys.  And keep in mind that climbing a pole will involve
either those metal rods that are nailed into the pole up its length
to stand on (best, I think), or you will have to get spikes that
attach to your feet, and jam them into the side of the pole as you
climb step by step.  The foot-spike method is extra dangerous to
untrained climbers - because if you slip, you slide down the pole
and get nasty splinters in, uh, shall I say, sensitive areas.

  I have seen electric companies (of course) use utility poles for
antennas, and the occasional oil companies, etc, here and there, also
have utility pole antenna "towers".  My town still has their original
antenna-bearing utility pole - although they have a newer 250 foot
self-supporting tower at that site now.

  Bob Bruhns, WA3WDR, [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:18 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!uunet!in1.uu.net!oronet!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jim Weir)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Capacitance/inductance per foot of xmission lines
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 1996 18:40:36 GMT
Organization: RST Engineering
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <536a5g$[e-mail]>
References: <5365of$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: rst-engr.oro.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (THamm40820) shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:

->Hi,

-  Also, since capacitance per foot is noted (for
->coax), why isn't inductance per foot also noted ?

Because by definition, transmission line impedance is equal to

        Zo = sqrt(L/C)

Now if you know the impedance (Zo) and know the capacitance (C) then the
inductance is quite easily calculated.  It is sort of like not giving the
voltage rating on a resistor if you are given the resistance and the
wattage.

Jim

Jim Weir VP Engineering | You bet your sweet patootie I speak for the
RST Engineering         | company.  If I don't, ain't nobody gonna.
Grass Valley CA 95945   |
http://www.rst-engr.com | AR Adv WB6BHI--FCC 1st phone---Cessna 182A N73CQ
[e-mail]        | Commercial/CFI-Airplane/Glider-A&P-FAA Counselor



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:19 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!dawn.mmm.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Roy McCammon)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,sci.physics.electromag
Subject: Re: mismatch between free-space and receiving dipole: seems unimportant
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 1996 12:37:44 -0700
Organization: 3M
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <531gs7$[e-mail]>
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:24495 sci.physics.electromag:11694

Jason Williams-Lock wrote:

> But in my case, even though I have a 4:1 impedance mismatch between
> free-space (376.7 ohms) and the receiving dipole (1506 ohms, or there
> abouts), despite this, it seems to have no *noticeable* effect on the
> reception whatsoever ?
>
> Can anyone explain this ? I know mismatches are important (and
> *dangerous*) for transmitters but here we are only dealing with pico-watts
> (pW), the power density (P=E*H) watts per square metre, or P=(E*E)/Zo,
> where Zo is the intrinsic impedance of free-space.


Receivers must cope with variation in power of more than a million to one.
The mere 4:1 mismatch is minuscule with respect to that.  Receiver performance
is generally limited more by signal to noise ratio than by signal power.  In a
n
urban enviroment, most of that noise is interference, that is it comes from
sources external to the antenna.  As long as the antenna mismatches the
interference to the same extent as the signal of interest, the signal to
power ratio is unchanged, and as you fould out, you cannot tell the difference
.

A transmitter is a different story.  Lets confine ourselves to a narrow band
transmitter, like ordinary radio. That means the bandwidth is narrow enough
with respect to the center frequency that we can take all the signal power as
being at the center frequency.  Well, the signal goes out the cable to the
antenna.  Some of it is transmitted, some of it is reflected.  The signal
that is reflect goes the entire length of the cable and back, so it may be
phase shifted with respect to the outgoing signal.  No matter how much the
delay and reflection, the reflected signal as seen by the transmitter has
some definate phase and amplitude and causes a current into the transmitter
of some definate phase and amplitude, which adds to the current from the
transmitter.  So, the transmitter voltage divided by this sum current gives
an impedence.  Depending on the losses, delays, and mismatch, this impedence
can vary from almost a short (zero ohms) to almost open (infinite ohms).  So
now, the answer to your question about what happens to a transmitter, as
long as we are talking about narrow band (so there is only one frequency and a
well defined impedence at that frequency) is just a problem in circuit theory.
The question just becomes: what if any impededence put on the transmitter woul
d
be harmful?  A short?  An open?  I don't know.  It depends on the particular
transmitter at hand.

Opinions expressed herein are my own and may not represent those of my employe
r.


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:21 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!news.postech.ac.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!newsfeed.dacom.co.kr!arclight.uoregon.edu!nntp.primenet.com!news.asu.edu!aztec.asu.edu!hamop
From: [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Kurt's rectangle
Date: 5 Oct 1996 19:41:29 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <536dl9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aztec.asu.edu


Addendum to #24372

        Now consider this short dipole as a segment in a n
antenna and sum up these segments over the entire antenna by
method of moments for the entire pattern and resulting earth
effects.

Charlie, W7XC
--


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:25 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!surfnet.nl!sun4nl!sun4nl!news.worldaccess.nl!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antw: What if I trim the dipole to fit
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 96 22:27:41 GMT
Organization: Not organized at all ! ! !
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lwd1-8.worldaccess.nl
X-Newsreader: Quarterdeck Message Center [1.1]

A desperite ha wrote:

> I'm setting up a 160-10 meter dipole but was a little too optimistic
> about the length from one corner of my little city lot to the other.
> The wire is now 134' long and about 14' too long to fit comfortably.
> My choices seem to be:
>
> 1) Erect a pole on the roof of my house to raise the center into an
> inverted V and take up the slack that way.  It would be a bend of some 30
> degrees, not 90!
>
> 2) snip those 14' right off (along with any hope for 160 meter contacts?).
>
> Can you comment on the pros and cons of either approach?  You can also
> tell me that 160 meters isn't worth trying to bother with 180 watts
> and a dipole, and I'll listen to you.  Thanks for any tips.   Randy
> --
>                                              [e-mail]


SNIP IT OFF!!!! Don't make any trouble about the exact length of dipoles!
Anything 10 or 20% near the exact electrical length you WILL NOT NOTICE in
performance. You will of course notice the short-coming in SWR, but as many
GOOD authors will try to explain you, this is no problem! Just use a tuner nea
r
your set to match out the difference from your output impedance. If you have a

tube-transmitter you probably don't even need a tuner.
There is still a lot of confusion about SWR <> 1, but for HF there is simply n
o
discussion neccesary, since losses from standing waves are neglectably low.
Power reflected at the antenna terminals with be re-reflected at the tuner-spo
t
and be redirected to the antenna. So an SWR = 3 DOES NOT MEAN 25 percent loss
of power, it simply means the 25 percent does a two-way travel to your
transmitter and will be transmitted in phase with the primairaly transmitted
power (at least 75 percent). The re-re-re-flected power (1/16th of the orginal

does again a two-way trip to your tranmitter and is transmitted an instant
later in phase).

So: get it right and do not believe fairy-tales about bad SWR, at least not as

long you're working on DC-bands (everything below 100 MHz) and you keep away
from 10 kilometer long transmission lines.

Literature:
Reflections, transmission lines and antennas, section 4.4,
    written by: M.W. Maxwell W2DU, ARRL ($20)
The ARRL Antenna book, pages 70-80 and 80-136,
    written by: several, ARRL
and 133 more . . .  (just ask)

Good luck,


+-----------------------------------+
|  Henk                             |
|      'Hank Panthouse'             |
|                  Broekhuizen      |
|   P A 3 B L P                     |
+-----------------------------------+
|     email: [e-mail]    |
+-----------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------+
| Reflection only means that        |
|       you get a response to       |
|            what you're doing.     |
| So reflection is no loss ! ! !    |
+-----------------------------------+



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:26 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!surfnet.nl!sun4nl!sun4nl!news.worldaccess.nl!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Antw: Re: Hopeless to run HF voice at 100 watts?
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 96 22:28:46 GMT
Organization: Not organized at all ! ! !
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
 <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lwd1-9.worldaccess.nl
X-Newsreader: Quarterdeck Message Center [1.1]
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24474 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:32695 rec.radio.amateur.misc:107162

In history it was written:
>
>
> Thanks to all who replied! Its good to know that is hope at 100 watts.
>
> I'll have to work in this, as it is quit hard being on the first floor
> and surrounded by neighbors on all sides and above. When my lease is
> up, I'll have to do some serious prospecting on a more suitable apartment.
>

Lucky us people of Holland (or if you prefer: The Netherlands), since our
powerlimit used to be 100 Watts, so no discussion neccesary.
Nowadays the limit has been raised to 400 Watts PEP.

----
+-----------------------------------+
|  Henk                             |
|      'Hank Panthouse'             |
|                  Broekhuizen      |
+-----------------------------------+
|     email: [e-mail]    |
+-----------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------+
| It's better to burn up,           |
|            than to fade away      |
+-----------------------------------+



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:27 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!surfnet.nl!sun4nl!sun4nl!news.worldaccess.nl!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antw: Is a Balun Necessary?
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 96 22:28:54 GMT
Organization: Not organized at all ! ! !
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4qcvro$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lwd1-9.worldaccess.nl
X-Newsreader: Quarterdeck Message Center [1.1]

History tells us:
> I am going to put up a yagi monobander and am wondering if a 1:1 is at
> all necessary? Any and all opinions will be appreciated.
>
> --
>
>   Gareth Crispell  N1MSV

No balun is neccesary, there are many other means of making the yagi symmetric

antenna suitable for the (I suppose:) a-symmetric coaxial cable. It really
depends on your needs. For small bandwiths a gamma-match is excellent. Also a
bazooka sleeve forces the power to follow the coax cable.
Take a look at the ARRL Antenna handbook.

Greetings,
----
+-----------------------------------+
|  Henk                             |
|      'Hank Panthouse'             |
|                  Broekhuizen      |
|   P A 3 B L P                     |
+-----------------------------------+
|     email: [e-mail]    |
+-----------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------+
| It's better to burn up,           |
|            than to fade away      |
+-----------------------------------+



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:28 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!demos!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!surfnet.nl!sun4nl!sun4nl!news.worldaccess.nl!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antw: Re: SWR and matching problems?
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 96 22:30:04 GMT
Organization: Not organized at all ! ! !
Lines: 67
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <4t2cik$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
 <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lwd1-10.worldaccess.nl
X-Newsreader: Quarterdeck Message Center [1.1]

History recorded lately:
> >
> > This recommendation solves the matching problem at the transmitter BUT
> > the coax cable still has the SWR and resulting losses.  If SWR is not
> > too bad then no problem, but if the SWR is high you only fool the
> > transmitter and yourself.  My opinion - it is much better to make the
> > antenna 50 ohms so that it matches the impedance of the cable.
>
> I got in on this a little late, sorry. As I recall the load is duplicated
> at the source (radio) whenever the feedline is a multiple of 1/2
> wavelength at the operating frequency. It does not matter what the
> characteristic Z of the feedline is. The SWR problem arises when the line
> is not a half wavelength; the line then performs as a transformer.
>
> It is the above condition that makes antenna tuners so popular. The name
> antenna tuner is a bit of a misnomer as very few are located at the
> antenna where they belong. This is especially true for antennas with coax
> feedlines. If the tuner is located at the source, it doesn't change the
> SWR on the feedline. The tuner is just another transformer in the system
> to keep the radio happy! If the tuner is located at the antenna, it still
> acts as another transformer in the system, but now the feedline has no
> appreciable SWR.
>
> W0MAY
>

Agree: the SWR on the transmission line is not affected by the tuner, but who
gives a $@#$%!!!! Did you know that lots of space-craft antenna systems have a

SWR of worse than 1:2!!!!
Only is the following conditions apply together, SWR is of interest:
- high frequencies (>> 30 MHz) AND
- long transmission lines AND
- considerable loss in the transmission line.

In ALL other cases a antenna tuner (at the transmitter location) will
re-reflect the reflected power IN PHASE, so this power part is transmitted a
little later. Since it is in phase (by the tuner) it still contributes to the
signal!!!
If for instance SWR is 1:3, and transmission line loss is 5 dB, then the 25
percent reflected power is almost all lost (it is attenuated with 10 dB before

it gets back to the antenna). If SWR is better or the transmissionline loss is

less than 5 dB: who cares.

For HF transmission line loss is in most cases less than 1 dB, so don't worry
about a 'bad' SWR!!!!!

Please read ARRL ANTENNA HANDBOOK pages 70-80 and 90-136 of the '64 edition,
or: Reflections, transmission lines and antennas, by M.W. Maxwell, W2DU

Both are totally right about this difficult and mostly misunderstood subject!!
!!


----
+-----------------------------------+
|  Henk                             |
|      'Hank Panthouse'             |
|                  Broekhuizen      |
|  P A 3 B L P                      |
+-----------------------------------+
|     email: [e-mail]    |
+-----------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------+
| Reflection ?                      |
| Your talking about my forehead ?  |
+-----------------------------------+



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:29 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!demos!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.erols.net!surfnet.nl!sun4nl!sun4nl!news.worldaccess.nl!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antw:  Birds on the Beam
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 96 22:31:14 GMT
Organization: Not organized at all ! ! !
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <531hek$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lwd1-11.worldaccess.nl
X-Newsreader: Quarterdeck Message Center [1.1]


> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
> >
> >You know, when they were having bird problems on the space shuttle they
> >used a balloon with a giant eye pasted on it. I wonder if there's
> >anything along that idea that might work on a tower?
> >
> >Mark
> >
>
>

In Hollond a company called 'Koopmans' sells a sort of paintlike substance tha
t
makes birds wanna leave the surface they're sitting on. The stuff is called
'AntiMOSK'. I don't have an address, but it is also available from VRZA (on of

the two Dutch radio-ham organisations). Addresses should be available through
your local radio-ham organisations.


----
+-----------------------------------+
|  Henk                             |
|      'Hank Panthouse'             |
|                  Broekhuizen      |
|  P A 3 B L P                      |
+-----------------------------------+
|     email: [e-mail]    |
+-----------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------+
| It's better to burn up,           |
|            than to fade away      |
+-----------------------------------+



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:30 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!lade.news.pipex.net!pipex!tube.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: MW Loop Antenna question
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 1996 23:24:13 GMT
Organization: UUNet PIPEX server (post doesn't reflect views of UUNet PIPEX)
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: al048.du.pipex.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.275

I am looking for a design of a loop antenna similar to the KIWA MW
loop. Unfortunately, I can't possibly afford the 350 UKP price of the
KIWA, much as I would like to buy it, so building a similar
design(balanced loop with DG Mosfet amplifier and bandwidth control)
is the only alternative. Has anyone built a design by GF Maynard
called the "WQ medium wave loop"? . This appeared in the UK "Shortwave
magazine" in November 1986, and looks very impressive. However, the
construction is VERY complex, so I would like to gather any opinions
before starting on the project myself.

TIP FOR UK LOOP FANATICS:
Any experimenters with loops might like to know that ARGOS sells a
product called a "TV Turntable" for around 7UKP, which is perfect for
mounting a rotating loop, especially if it's completed project and a
smart appearance is needed. AFAIK it is only available at ARGOS
superstores. I have had difficulty in finding very wide diameter
plastic pipe(12 to 24 inches) or something similar, again for loops.
Any ideas?


Regards,


Joe Kirlew


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:31 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
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!grizzly.denali.net!NEWS!lostgate.matnet.com!cbrown
From: [e-mail] (Christopher E. Brown)
Subject: Re: 9913  Max volts
Message-ID: <a57cc$e1e27.cd@NEWS>
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 1996 23:30:39 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Lines: 10

Cecil Moore ([e-mail]) wrote:
: My Antenna Book doesn't give the Maximum RMS Operating Voltage
: for 9913. Does anyone know it? A friend said 200v but that
: sounds low for 1/2" coax.

: thanks and 73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)


        I *think* that RG8, 213/U, 9913, etc...  arc through at ~ 4000 -
5000V.



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:32 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.campus.mci.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Phil Brown)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna construction resources on the WWW?
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 01:39:35 GMT
Organization: CampusMCI
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <5372ks$[e-mail]>
References: <53184l$[e-mail]> <531lho$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: s01-pm04.auburn.campus.mci.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Don Huff <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Phil Brown wrote:
>>
>> [e-mail] (Tony White) wrote:
>>
>> >Anyone have a few bookmarks/links for good antenna construction resorces?
>>
>> >Looking for stuff for 2m and a good general purpose 10-160 to be used with
 an
>> >antenna tuner.  All help appreciated.  Thanks.
>>
>> Try http://www.qth.com/antenna/       for the "Antenna Elmer"
>>
>> Good place to start.
>>
>> 73
>>
>> ==============================================================
>> Phil Brown                   [e-mail]
>> Amateur Radio N4COD
>> Video Producer/Instructor
>> www.tigerweb.com

>Phil OM,

>  Best resources are in books.  ARRL Antenna Book, and numerous other
>titles.  Check your local library.  This is easier/better/more
>instructive than searching on the web for multiple answers to multiple
>questions.

>73, and GL<

>    Don, W6JL

Hi, Don,

I agree. Books are great, got a bunch of 'em, still refer quite often
to my '77 ARRL antenna book. BUT with no local place to buy books,
without ordering and the required wait (not to mention the cost), and
no ham books in any nearby library, and a world of free info right
here in front of me on the internet, books are not always the right
answer. Internet is a great resource. Not the only one, of course. But
a convenient one for many of us. The times they are a-changing.

Thanks and 73
Phil

==============================================================
Phil Brown                   [e-mail]
Amateur Radio N4COD
Video Producer/Instructor
www.tigerweb.com



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:33 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!dimensional.com!dimensional
From: [e-mail] (Richard Kaiser)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: High gain directional antenna for FM radio
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 96 02:23:39 GMT
Organization: Dimensional Communications
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <5371mu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: p16.pm-4.pm.dimensional.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress 2.0 Beta #2

Sorry this is not a ham antenna question, but this is the only antenna group.

I just moved into the fringe area of the only FM radio station to broadcast a
favorite radio station (Thistle and Shamrock).  I am also getting a little
interference from another station in the opposite direction on the same
frequency (91.5 MHz).

I figured out I had a problem with stock dipole.  I also tried an amplified
antenna, but it wasn't directional.

I am looking for any suggestions on a high gain directional antenna.
A directional amplified antenna that actually improves the signal to
noise ratio may also work.  The one I tried increased the received
power, but didn't change the signal to noise.

If I need to build something I have a patio closet I can build in.
Construction needs to stay reasonable as I am in the bottom floor of
a three floor apartment.  (Maybe I will be a home owner next year.)

For those familiar with Denver I am trying to receive KUNC from Greeley in
Littleton.

You can get technical, I am a slightly rusty EE making a living doing
embedded real-time software.

Thanks very much

Richard Kaiser


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:34 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.cdsnet.net!news.magicnet.net!iag.net!news.misty.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-in2.uu.net!delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antw: What if I trim the dipole to fit
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 96 23:47:02 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1b.delphi.com
X-To: <[e-mail]>

<[e-mail]> writes:

>There is still a lot of confusion about SWR <> 1, but for HF there is simply
no
>discussion neccesary, since losses from standing waves are neglectably low.

Let's take a case where the above statement is not true. Someone
a few days ago, wanted to use a coax-fed 20m half-wave dipole as
an all band antenna. I modeled it on 10m and EZNEC said an SWR of
17:1. With 100ft of RG-58 that would result in about 6dB of
attenuation, or 75% of the power lost in the coax. Granted, it is
only about 1.5 'S' units but not "negligibly low" IMO.

We must be careful about blanket statements. "Negligible losses"
means different things to different people. Each person needs
to estimate their losses and decide for themselves whether it
is negligible or not.

73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:34 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!uunet!in3.uu.net!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx07-29
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Capacitance/inductance per foot of xmission lines
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 96 06:56:46 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <537l5g$[e-mail]>
References: <537bh4$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx07-29.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3


Belden lists the following for their cables:

Belden 9085 (300 ohm): 4.5 pF/ft.
Belden 8285 (300 ohm): 4.6 pF/ft.
Belden 8230 (300 ohm): 3.6 pF/ft.
Belden 8225 (300 ohm): 4.4 pF/ft.
Belden 8275 (300 ohm): 3.6 pF/ft.

I couldn't find any 450 ohm cable in their 1989 catalog.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:35 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!newsflash.concordia.ca!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!news.enter.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (bob puharic)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need info on screwdriver antennas
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 08:08:22 GMT
Organization: ENTER.NET
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <5370ql$[e-mail]>
References: <01bbafba$77ee3ba0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm1-8.enter.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

"Raymond Jeffus" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>I'm trying to find out from anyone that may have any  experience with the
>HS1000 from High Sierra or the BB3 from TJ Antennas.

>Your thoughts on quality, ease of use and durability would be appreciated.

>Thanks

>Raymond
>AC5CP
>[e-mail]

I have to add one note though. TJ antennas got a bad shipment of
toroids...the original one that came with my antenna was bad, and the
replacement they sent is likewise bad. THIS IS A BIG PAIN IN THE ASS.
At this point i would probably consider the high sierra. Im getting
tired of having paid 265 bux for an antenna that's unusable.



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:36 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!newsflash.concordia.ca!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!news.enter.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (bob puharic)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: bb3/tj antenna toroids
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 08:10:53 GMT
Organization: ENTER.NET
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <5370vd$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm1-8.enter.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

I just got a TJ antenna BB3 antenna...worked great for  a few days
then the matching went crazy on 20 meters. I called them and they said
they'd had some bad toroids and would send a new one immediately.
well, the new one is no better...no matching at all. It isnt me, or
the mounting method because it matches fine on 20 meters and above
without the toroid (as TJ says it should). This is a HUGE headache
because hooking up the toroid aint all that easy. anyone have any
experience?



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:37 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-stkh.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!nntp-oslo.UNINETT.no!nntp-trd.UNINETT.no!troll.powertech.no!usenet
From: Karl Martin Gjestrum <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Best antenna for 40M DX
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 10:55:43 +0200
Organization: Kalles Surfeklubb DELUXE
Lines: 2
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-ppp7.applause.no

What is the best wire dx antenna for 40M (have plenty of trees and
space).


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:38 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!news-stkh.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!nntp-oslo.UNINETT.no!nntp-trd.UNINETT.no!troll.powertech.no!usenet
From: Karl Martin Gjestrum <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Best antenna for 80M DX
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 10:55:47 +0200
Organization: Kalles Surfeklubb DELUXE
Lines: 2
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-ppp7.applause.no

What is the best wire dx antenna for 80M (have plenty of trees and
space).


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:39 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!newspump.sol.net!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!btnet!news.enterprise.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (John Mc`Pherson Anderson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: HF mobile antennas. What performs best ?
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 96 16:22:31 GMT
Organization: Amateur Radio Station MI0AAZ
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: max04-190.enterprise.net
X-Newsreader: Quarterdeck Message Center [1.1]

Hi there all Radio Hams World Wide. I am interested in maybe trying out
operating HF mobile and i see there are quite a few different manufacturers of

antennas about and i want an honest opinion of whose is the best. The bands
which interest me the most for mobile operations are 80 metres and 20 metres
but if a good multiband HF whip is available that may be of interest.
73 de John MI0AAZ in Coleraine (QRA IO65QD).




From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:39 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!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: Re: Best antenna for 40M DX
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 19:51:58 +0200
Organization: Kalles Surfeklubb DELUXE
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[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-ppp8.applause.no

Thanks a lot for the reply Cecil


I do want a omni-directional radiation pattern.
And by the way I think I have really good ground.

Best 73 de LA7EJA

Karl Martin Gjestrum <[e-mail]> writes:

>What is the best wire dx antenna for 40M (have plenty of trees and

Hi Karl, your question cannot be answered until you tell us
what kind of radiation pattern you want. If it is single
direction the answer will be different than if it is
omni-directional. Also the answer depends on whether
you have a good ground or not.

73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:40 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Dale LeDoux)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Info QRP SWR brg ?
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 20:13:33 GMT
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <5397cn$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.230.136.87
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Avatar <[e-mail]> wrote:

>I'd like to get recommendations for a accurate, quality engineered SWR
>bridge in the 1 to 5 watt range covering 1.8-30 MHz inclusive. It can be
>assembled or kit. Please state model and manufacturer info where I can
>get technical details.

>my email: [e-mail]

>Thanks in advance for your help.

>73's
>Dave
>W0MAY

Try Oak Hills Research at www.ohr.com.  They make just what you
want...

BTW, you might want to try the QRP-L mailing list for a bunch of
qrp-related topics...

72,
KD5QI





From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:41 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!alpha.sky.net!newshub.csu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.uoregon.edu!news.u.washington.edu!news.alt.net!newspost1.alt.net!usenet
From: "Peter Gottlieb" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: How would I solve this?
Date: 6 Oct 1996 23:21:36 GMT
Organization: Altopia Corp. - Affordable Usenet Access - http://www.alt.net
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <01bbb3dd$3b414c20$72132399@peter-s>
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

How would I solve this problem:

        I have an antenna tuner that is designed to match a 15 to 35 foot vertical
whip to
a 50 Ohm transmitter, at better than 1.5:1 SWR from 2 to 30 MHz, 1 kW.  I
would like to
connect this to a 130 foot long dipole which is fed with 450 Ohm ladder
line.  I have a balun
kit which can be configured any which way, to connect the unbalanced tuner
to the balanced
line.

The question is, how would I begin to figure out the balun ratio?

If anybody could point me in the right direction, I would appreciate it.

P.S., theory/math doesn't scare me, and I would love to know how to do
this, rather than
simply having someone tell me the answer.

...Peter


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:42 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.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: Resonance vs. Impedance
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 96 03:45:29 GMT
Organization: Not Enough
Lines: 21
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <539ugq$[e-mail]>
References: <5318oq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (Terry Hubbard) wrote:

>Can someone explain in simple terms the interaction between resonance
>and impedance.

      <snip>

>When the sloping element is cut for resonance on 3.7mhz the antenna
>is not 50 ohms at the feed point. The antenna can be pruned for a
>good 50 ohm match at the feed point and low swr, however, is the
>antenna then no longer resonant?

Reactance plus resistance causes a higher SWR than the equivalent
resistance alone.  Also, as an antenna is adjusted in and out of
resonance, its reactance changes much more quickly than its
resistance.  As a result of these two factors, the dip in SWR
occurs at the point of resonance, even when the resistive value
of the antenna does not match the feedline.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:43 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-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How would I solve this?
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 96 03:53:09 GMT
Organization: Not Enough
Lines: 27
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <539uv6$[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb3dd$3b414c20$72132399@peter-s>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   "Peter Gottlieb" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>How would I solve this problem:
>
>       I have an antenna tuner that is designed to match a 15 to 35
>foot vertical whip to a 50 Ohm transmitter, at better than 1.5:1 SWR
>from 2 to 30 MHz, 1 kW.  I would like to connect this to a 130 foot
>long dipole which is fed with 450 Ohm ladder line.  I have a balun
>kit which can be configured any which way, to connect the unbalanced
>tuner to the balanced line.
>
>The question is, how would I begin to figure out the balun ratio?

Hi Peter,

Baluns are designed to work into a specific range of load
impedances.  Driving them into loads outside that range can cause
a number of problems including power consumption in the balun and
loss of balance (feeder radiation).

To do what you want, you will need to either A) adjust the
feedline on each band so that a reasonable impedance is presented
to the balun, B) use a balanced T or Pi network tuner, or C) use
a link-coupled tuner such as a Johnson Matchbox.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:48 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.cdsnet.net!news.magicnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news.starnet.net!thepit.trucom.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Marty Albert)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Fox Hunt!
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 05:09:39 GMT
Organization: TruCom Internet Services
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <53a3pk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup13.trucom.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:107182 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24498

Hello, Folks:

On October 13, 1996 the Eastern Ozarks Amateur Radio Club (EOARC) will
sponsor a Fox Hunt in St. Francois County Missouri.

Sign up will be from 1300-1330 at the Mineral Area College parking lot
in Park Hills (formerly Flat River) and the Hunt itself will start at
1400.

Entry is _FREE_ but you must register!!

Maps of St. Francois County will be provided.

The Fox will live on 2m FM simplex and the exact frequency will be
announced by the Fox at 1400. The Fox will be somewhere in St.
Francois County.

Certificates and ribbons will be awarded.

From St. Louis, take Interstate 55 south to US highway 67 south to the
Leadington/Park Hills exit then turn left.

From Cape Girardeau, take Interstate 55 north to US Highway 67 south
as above.

From Poplar Bluff, take US Highway 67 north to exit as above and turn
right.

You may call on the EOARC repeater on 147.030 (+600) for talk-in.

All Amateurs are welcome and encouraged to attend!

Take Care & 73



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

Heartland Internet Services

*************************************************
Virtual Web Servers from only $29.00 a month!
http://www.adgrafix.com/info/calbertjr
*************************************************



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:50 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!hunter.premier.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!news.cdsnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-ana-24.sprintlink.net!ratty.wolfe.net!usenet
From: Ramon Gandia <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2 Meter Mobile vs. Garage Door
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 21:39:53 -0800
Organization: Anvil Technology
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <5377i3$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: nome-ts1-p01.nome.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Ron Cole wrote:

> I would be concerned about the antenna being too close to the operator
> when mounted on the rear view mirror.  50 Watts on 2 meters at arms
> length has to exceed exposure limits.

When I was 16-17 I worked as a transmitter engineer at WKVM, which had
a homebuilt 25-kilowatt transmitter.  This was in 1962-63.  Nice job
of homebuilding, I may add.

The transmitter was totally unshielded, and the PA coils, etc were
open to the air.  This was behind the transmitter and separated by
cyclone fencing to keep people safe.  So was the 10 kv supply,
modulator, etc.....

In any case, the transmitter was inside a metal Butler-type building,
and the transmission lines to the directional array were open wire
lines.  These were coax; four ground wires sorrounding 2 parallel
wires for center conductors.

The r.f. field inside the building was "intense".  How intense?  You
could take a 100 watt light bulb, hook a loop of wire to it, about
3 to 5 feet of wire, and the bulb would light up full brightness and
flicker along with the modulation!

I did notice that the people that worked there, and had been working
there for years, were sort of....loony.  I mean, these guys were out
in left field.  I was only a kid working part time (1st Class FCC),
but I was glad when I left to go to college.

Maybe I am a bit cuckoo myself now...!

Ramon, AL7X   [ To foil SpamBots, my address is not machine readable.
Nome, Alaska  [ Please reply to:   rfg.at.nome.dot.net


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:52 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!news.uoregon.edu!news.u.washington.edu!news.alt.net!news1.alt.net!news.aa.net!ratty.wolfe.net!usenet
From: Ramon Gandia <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ladder line feed for UHF
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 21:58:12 -0800
Organization: Anvil Technology
Lines: 77
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: nome-ts1-p01.nome.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Philip H Fritz wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
> I am looking for a better way to feed a Jpole UHF antenna long distances
> without using lossy coax. Hardline is out of the price range and regular
> 9913 is too heavy for where this antenna is going.
> What I am looking for is 450 or 300 open line feeds for these VHF/UHF
> antennas and how to accomplish this easily.
> Anyone out there already doing this?

Just run the twin lead or open wire line up and down the J pole's
bazooka to get the right match.

At the other end (ham shack end) use a 4:1 balun to go to 75 ohms.
Or you could use 50 ohms, and a tuning stub to match it to 50 ohms.
The simplest coax balun, good for one band, is the one made out of
a U-piece of coax.

Like this:  the feedline comes from your radio.  Cut the coax, and
peel back the insulation so you can connect to the shield and center
conductor.  Lay this feedline down.

Take another piece of coax, a half wavelength, or odd multiple
thereof.  This has to account for velocity factor.  Thus, if you
use regular RG-213 coax, with v.f. of 0.66, you would take the
free space half wave and multiply by .66.  For instance, on
449 mHz, the length in inches is:

                492 x 12 x .66
                --------------  =  8.66 inches
                    449

This is kinda short, so you could use an odd multiple of it.  If you
use a factor of 3, it will match both 2 meters and 440 mHz.

Okay, bend this short piece of coax into a u-shape.  Bring the ends
towards the end of the feedline coax.  Tie all three shields
together and solder.  Tie the feedline center conductor to the
one of the short coax center conductors.  The high impedance ladder
line or twin lead connects:  One wire to the junction of the two
center conductors, and the other wire to the free center conductor.

You can see why this works.  The far end of the short coax is 180
degrees out of phase, and thus drives the balanced ladder line.

You can cancel out any residual swr with a coax stub or ladder line
stub.

Put a 300 ohm composition resistor at the far end of the 300 ohm
twin lead, or a 450 ohm (470 is close enough) for 450 ohm line.
Take a short piece of same line, about half wave, and hook it to
your ladder line near the balun.  The little stub will open at the
dangling end.  Just adjust the length of the stub, and the point it
connects to, to get 1:1 swr on the coax side of things.  It helps
to use a high power transmitter set for low power, as you can leave
it on continuously without hurting anything.  The stub needs to be
a bit longer or a bit shorter than a half wave or it will have no
effect.  Try half inch to an inch shorter and slide it around for
minimum swr.  If not right, shorten it another inch or half inch and
try again.  There is plenty of latitude in this adjustment, ie,
you can use different lengths within reason by just moving the
attachement points.

Once adjusted on the resistor (make sure your power is low enough not
to fry or heat the resistor!  You could dip it in distilled water to
keep it cool too) the antenna can be hooked up to the ladder line or
twin lead feed, and the attachment point adjusted on the trombone to
get a perfect match.  In fact, it could attach to any antenna that
is fed with open line.  A collinear array, or a beam with a folded
dipole, etc.  Many collinear arrays terminate in a stub shorted at
the bottom, and you pick the 300 ohm or 450 ohm point by tapping
the feedline on it for perfect match.

Good luck to you.

Ramon, AL7X   [ To foil SpamBots, my address is not machine readable.
Nome, Alaska  [ Please reply to:   rfg.at.nome.dot.net


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:53 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-11.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-3.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-ana-24.sprintlink.net!ratty.wolfe.net!usenet
From: Ramon Gandia <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How would I solve this?
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 22:25:37 -0800
Organization: Anvil Technology
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb3dd$3b414c20$72132399@peter-s> <539uv6$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: nome-ts1-p01.nome.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

WB3U wrote:
>
>    "Peter Gottlieb" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> >How would I solve this problem:
> >
> >       I have an antenna tuner that is designed to match a 15 to 35
> >foot vertical whip to a 50 Ohm transmitter, at better than 1.5:1 SWR
> >from 2 to 30 MHz, 1 kW.  I would like to connect this to a 130 foot
> >long dipole which is fed with 450 Ohm ladder line.  I have a balun
> >kit which can be configured any which way, to connect the unbalanced
> >tuner to the balanced line.
> >
> >The question is, how would I begin to figure out the balun ratio?
>
> Hi Peter,
>
> Baluns are designed to work into a specific range of load
> impedances.  Driving them into loads outside that range can cause
> a number of problems including power consumption in the balun and
> loss of balance (feeder radiation).
>
> To do what you want, you will need to either A) adjust the
> feedline on each band so that a reasonable impedance is presented
> to the balun, B) use a balanced T or Pi network tuner, or C) use
> a link-coupled tuner such as a Johnson Matchbox.

To which I may add that while the typical Balun has a ferrite core,
and will behave like Jack, W3BU stated, there are other baluns which
do not use ferrites and may do what you want.  The ferrite core is
to reduce the size of the balun....they can be made from feedlines
wound into coils (like the old time baluns that had what looked like
open coils, but were actually TWO wires wound up into a coil.

Or the open feedline could be shorted at the tuner end and grounded
there.  The tuner's hot output could be tapped on ONE of the
transmission line's legs until a point is found that will match the
frequencies of interest.  It helps if the short is adjustable, and
if the tuner end of the open line is bent into a loop so that the
hot wire from the tuner is short so as not to radiate.....

Ramon, AL7X   [ To foil SpamBots, my address is not machine readable
Nome, Alaska  [ Please address your e-mail to:   rfg.at.nome.dot.net


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:54 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!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!news.structured.net!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx02-09
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: mismatch between free-space and receiving dipole: seems unimportant
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 96 08:08:07 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <53adn7$[e-mail]>
References: <53a4r5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx02-09.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <53a4r5$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS) wrote:

>Jason,
>        While it is true that the square root of the ratio of the
>magnetic and electric fields in Poyntings vector has the dimensions
>of an impedance and a value you mention, there is no such problem
>as "matching to the impedance of free space".  It certainly bears
>no relationship to the feedpoint impedance of any antena.
>Charlie, W7XC

Oh, no! You mean the "Free Space Antenna" I described in a posting to this
group earlier this year (in early April, as I recall) won't work?

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:55 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: Birds on the Beam
Date: 7 Oct 1996 08:26:12 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <53aer4$[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb064$2e30f840$70c32ace@redoutey> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup570.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <[e-mail]>, KD1YV <[e-mail]> writes:
>Richard G. Redoutey wrote:
>>
>No personal experience, but I read somewhere (maybe here, years ago) that
>loose-fitting plastic tubing slipped over the elements is effective.  When th
e
>bird lands on the tubing, "gravity works", the tubing spins so the bird is no
w
>upside-down, and pretty well instantly lets go to fly away in search of a mor
e
>secure perch.

  Well, the subject hasn't been extended to Possum, yet........


>Of course, the insulating effect may cause your antenna to require slight
>re-tuning, but you decide if it's worth the effort.
>
>Your mileage may vary (Say, what's metric for "mileage?")
>
>--
>73 de Jim, KD1YV

    Klic?  as in key x?

    :)

//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:56 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!usenet.seri.re.kr!newsfeed.dacom.co.kr!arclight.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.portal.ca!van-bc!unixg.ubc.ca!aurora.cs.athabascau.ca!news.mag-net.com!ve7tcp.ampr.org!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: multiple radial wire
Date: 7 Oct 96 13:00:57 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

The idea of getting down as many radials as possible can be more than
a chore,hi. I would solicit opinions on multi-radial wire. I got a good
deal on a spool of 25 conductor wire used for computers and by putting
4 of those down, am I not in actuallity putting down 100 radials? Sure
is a lot neater and faster!   73,Jeff.


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:57 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!newspump.sol.net!news.mindspring.com!realtime.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-22.sprintlink.net!jupiter.planet.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Bill Sohl)
Newsgroups: uk.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: VHF Communications Magazine
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 13:42:34 GMT
Organization: BL Enterprises
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <53b188$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: stan11.planet.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news2.epix.net uk.radio.amateur:15887 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24506 rec.radio.amateur.dx:342 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:32719 rec.radio.amateur.misc:107199

[e-mail] (Walt Davidson) wrote:

>Michael J Wooding <[e-mail]> wrote:

>>An index of the contents of this issue can be found on our WWW sites, as
>>can details of subscribing to the magazine for anyone who may be
>>interested.

>Now that *is* coming very close to "commercial advertising on Usenet",
>Mike!

Keep posting these Mike.  This is anything but an advertisement.  Me
thinks we worry to much about the purity of Usenet (it isn't illegal
to advertise anyway).  The short post of your's is a good piece of
info for those of us interested in VHF.  I see nothing at all wrong
with what was posted.

Bill Sohl (Amateur Radio Operator K2UNK)
Internet Instructor, Mount Olive (NJ) Community School



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:57 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.msfc.nasa.gov!info.uah.edu!maze.dpo.uab.edu!usenet
From: "Ed Dial" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Icom AH-2 antenna tuner connections
Date: 7 Oct 1996 15:00:47 GMT
Organization: UAB
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <01bbb462$942ea460$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 164.111.5.73
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

Does anyone have the pinouts on the ICOM 706 tuner connector designed for
the AH-2 antenna tuner?

Ed


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:58 1996
From: [e-mail] ("Anthony R. Gold")
Subject: Re: Goodbye.
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 96 15:27:08 GMT
Organization: Microvest Limited, London
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.30
Lines: 20
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!gatech!arclight.uoregon.edu!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!microvst.demon.co.uk!tgold
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
X-NNTP-Posting-User: [e-mail]
X-Mail2News-Path: news.demon.net!microvst.demon.co.uk
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24512 rec.radio.swap:73812 rec.radio.cb:30951

In article <[e-mail]>
           [e-mail] "James M Quillian" writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> Ken Bessler <[e-mail]> writes:

> >verticall. I just got out of the hospitall today. I have to go back in opn
> >monday to get my face ro constructed. I have lost the use of my lweft eye
> >because I managed to land head first on a cinder block.

> Ken, sorry you fell on your a- - !

You get the wrong end of the stick Jim, it was his EYE ball.

Hope you heal soon, Ken.  Why not just keep to using HT's?

Regards,
--
   Tony - G3SKR / AA2PM                  email: [e-mail]
                                                [e-mail]
                                        packet: g3skr@n0ary.#nocal.ca.usa.na


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:25:59 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-13.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How would I solve this?
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 09:40:59 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb3dd$3b414c20$72132399@peter-s> <539uv6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cjbriggs-mobl.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:
>... adjust the feedline on each band so that a reasonable impedance
> is presented to the balun...

Hi Jack, what if one is using a 4:1 balun with 450ohm ladder-line
(a popular configuration) and the SWR is 10:1. Of all the possible
choices of impedances for the balun to see, what would be the best?
The balun would change 45 ohms to 11 ohms?, 4500 ohms to 1100 ohms?,
or 318+j318 to ???? I don't see any impedance on this SWR circle that
would result in a happy balun.

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


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:26:01 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!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: Question on HAMSTICK
Date: 7 Oct 1996 16:42:49 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 26
Sender: [e-mail] (Frank Sved)
Message-ID: <53bbu9$[e-mail]>
References: <533anu$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Frank Sved)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca


Cecil Moore ([e-mail]) writes:
> Frank Sved wrote:
>> A friend told me he uses a ham stick and it works well.
>> Are these really any good for 80m?
>
> Hi Frank, if you can stand less than 1% efficiency. The
> coil on the 80m ham stick is low-Q and lossy compared
> to a high-Q bugcatcher with an efficiency of 2+%. A
> 100ft high, 130ft long dipole would be better. :-)
>
> Maybe Jesse, W6KKT, can post his actual measurements.
>
> 73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)


Actually, Cecil, you are aware of my current setup.  35' High 450
ladderline feeding two legs of 65' long.  Remeber it's in the oak tree.

I was curious, because my friend told me the hamstick would have given me
the same SWR and therefore same performance.

--


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


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:26:02 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!surfnet.nl!swidir.switch.ch!in2p3.fr!oleane!jussieu.fr!rain.fr!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-9.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best antenna for 40M DX
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 11:31:59 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cjbriggs-mobl.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)

Karl Martin Gjestrum wrote:
> I do want a omni-directional radiation pattern.
> And by the way I think I have really good ground.

Hi Karl, spreading your signal out in an omni-directional pattern
means close to 0 dBi "gain". A half-wave vertical-square fed halfway
on one side and broken with an insulator halfway on the other side
will give close to omni-directional. A vertical will also do the
trick. You would get a lot better performance out of two full-wave
loops, 90deg apart, switching between them.

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


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:26:04 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!howland.erols.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!psinntp!psinntp!tcgw.tandy.com!abacus.tis.tandy.com!usenet
From: "Jory McIntosh, KB5UBS" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Question on HAMSTICK
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 11:50:46 -0700
Organization: Tandy Corporation
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <533anu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jmcint1.tis.tandy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win16; I)

Frank Sved wrote:
>
> A friend told me he uses a ham stick and it works well.
>
> It is a fiberglass section with a metal whip on top.  Whip is ajustable
> for tuning.  Fiberglass section is loaded I believe.
>
> The base is a threaded 3/4" stud.
>
> Are these really any good for 80m?
> --
>
>   Bye for now, Frank Sved (VE3GID) at [e-mail]

The Ham sticks are great for 40 to 10 meters, I have been running them
for a couple of years now.  I have had some terrible luck getting my 75
meter Ham stick to show a decent SWR.  There is a tuning coil out on the
market now that is claimed to help with tuning the 75 meter ham stick.  I
have not tried this so I am not sure if it works or not.  I have managed
to make a few contacts on 75 by running an antenna tuner.

I say all in all, the ham sticks are pretty good for their size, (its
better than haveing some huge ugly looking thing attached to your car).
I have found that no matter what band you run with the ham sticks make
darn sure that you have the antenna is placed on a metal surface, the
better the ground plane, the better the antenna is going to work.

Gud Luck and 73
Jory McIntosh
KB5UBS


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:26:04 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news.sgi.com!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz.cv.hp.com!tomb
From: [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 9913  Max volts
Date: 7 Oct 1996 18:51:34 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard Corvallis Site
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <53bjfm$[e-mail]>
References: <a57cc$e1e27.cd@NEWS>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hplsnb.lsid.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL9.4]

Christopher E. Brown ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Cecil Moore ([e-mail]) wrote:
: : My Antenna Book doesn't give the Maximum RMS Operating Voltage
: : for 9913. Does anyone know it? A friend said 200v but that
: : sounds low for 1/2" coax.

: : thanks and 73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)


:       I *think* that RG8, 213/U, 9913, etc...  arc through at ~ 4000 -
: 5000V.

RG-213/U is rated for operation at 5000 volts RMS maximum.  I suspect
it doesn't actually arc thru till you get to WELL over that!  People
have been known to use it for sparkplug wire.

Isn't anyone going to just _CALL_ Belden and get the real word on
9913?  It is their product after all.

In any event, if you operate it at low SWR with duty cycles much higher
than what you'd get in a radar transmitter, the voltage rating will
never be your concern:  I^2*R loss will melt the insulation far before
you exceed the voltage rating.  Specifically, 5000 volts RMS at 50 ohms
is half a megawatt.  Even at high SWR you'll have more heating (at
current maxima) to worry about than flashover (at voltage maxima),
assuming the line is more than a quarter wave long.


--
Cheers,
Tom
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:26:08 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news.sgi.com!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!fc.hp.com!ron
From: [e-mail] (Ron Miller)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Goodbye.
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Date: 7 Oct 1996 20:10:04 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Fort Collins Site
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <53bo2s$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.fc.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2.10]
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24518 rec.radio.swap:73825 rec.radio.cb:30955

Ken Bessler ([e-mail]) wrote:

: because I managed to land head first on a cinder block. The damage was quite

: bad, including some peralisis <sp> of the left side of my bnody. My nose id
: GONE. My kids (4) are scared of me now! is this hobby worth it? no.

Point: It wasn't the hobby, it was the fall. Sorry, it sounds like a real
disaster. But you could have been doing something less fun such as painting
the trim on the house. A fall is a fall is a fall. Avoid them.


: Moral of the story:

: PLEASE BE CAREFULLL!! DON'T THINK THANK BECAUSE YOU HEV DONE SOMETHING BEFOR
E
: THAT NOTHING WILL HAPPEN!!! Theat is what happened to me. All I had to do wa
s
: untie a guy wire. I almost died!

Yes. Be careful. Whatever you do. Cleaning the gutters, painting, roofing,
rock climbing, or dinking with antennas. Just this morning I heard
that some lady fell 30 feet down a sewer because some low-life had
stolen the manhole cover.

: To hell with this hobby - it's not worth a LIFE.

To repeat: It wasn't the hobby. It was the fall.  You can blame whatever
you like, but the rest of us may not see it that way.



Ron Miller, 25 years of ham radio, haven't fallen yet
 (possibly because I've never had a decent antenna........)



From [e-mail] Mon Oct 07 20:26:12 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.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] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: mismatch between free-space and receiving dipole: seems unimportant
Date: 7 Oct 1996 20:15:06 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 26
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <53c6ea$[e-mail]>
References: <53a4r5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <53a4r5$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (CHARLES J.
MICHAELS) writes:

>Jason,
>        While it is true that the square root of the ratio of the
>magnetic and electric fields in Poyntings vector has the dimensions
>of an impedance and a value you mention, there is no such problem
>as "matching to the impedance of free space".  It certainly bears
>no relationship to the feedpoint impedance of any antena.
>Charlie, W7XC

I agree with Charlie.The ratio of electric to magnetic fields always has
some ratio at one point in a radiation field, but this has nothing to do
with the antenna impedance or efficiency in coupling.

The other answers given explain the reason why you see no signal
difference, the slight mismatch between the antenna and transmission line
is meaningless unless the S/N ratio in the system is limited by the
receiver's internal noise, or noise in the transmission line. The SWR on
the transmission line is determined by the receivers input terminal (NOT
the antenna). The actual power transfer "loss" due to mismatch occurs only
between the antenna and the transmission line. The feedline operates with
a low SWR (if the receive input matches the feedline), and does not suffer
increased attenuation from high SWR.
//
73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:19 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news3.cac.psu.edu!news.cse.psu.edu!news.cc.swarthmore.edu!netnews.upenn.edu!news.misty.com!news.ipass.net![e-mail]
From: Dave Hockaday <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 160 meter inverted L
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 11:41:40 -0700
Organization: IPass.net
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: customs212.ipass.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; I)

FORREST GEHRKE wrote:

> WT> 5.) Today, one radial is enough for 100% radiation efficiency. NO
> WT> strength tests need to be made.
> WT> What will tomorrow bring.
> Tom,

> You could always count the sheath of the feedline
> to act as that one radial! ;-)
> That way you wouldn't have to lay down another one.
> Do I get 100% radiation efficiency?
>   k2bt

Yeah, just slip a set of toroids down the feedline about 125' and call it
a coaxial dipole, hehehe...

--
Dave Hockaday WB4IUY
[e-mail]

http://www.ipass.net/~hockaday/
http://www.ipass.net/~wb4iuy/
http://www.ipass.net/~teara/
http://www.geocities.com/TheTropics/3349/
http://www.RTPnet.org/~fcarc/
http://www.RTPnet.org/~rdrc/


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:20 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!nntp.earthlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-ana-24.sprintlink.net!ratty.wolfe.net!usenet
From: Ramon Gandia <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2 Meter Mobile vs. Garage Door
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 1996 23:18:35 -0800
Organization: Anvil Technology
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: nome-ts1-p03.nome.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Charles E. Lear wrote:
> I have a Maldol 5/8 anntenna that I can fold
> over.  But it would have to be mounted near the driver's outside mirror
> so I could reach it.  This mounting gives a good SWR but, what about the
> radiation pattern.  I could go with a straight 1/4 wave on the roof or I
> could mount the 5/8 on the outside of the cargo box.

If you are on flat terrain, and don't go too fast, the half wave or
5/8 wave antenna (2-meters) works okay.  As soon as you start going
over hills and dales, or get fast enough for the antenna to bend
a bit and whip around, you start getting all sort of fade ins and
fade outs.  The theoretical gain of a long antenna comes from
concentrating the radiation towards the horizon, but it does not
work that way in typical mobile-in-motion situations.

The 1/4 wave whip will perform better in this case.  It is rigid,
does not whip, and the radiation lobe is more forgiving of
terrain where the big whip would send its signal into the sky, or
into the ground behind you.

Also, as you discovered, the long ones are sort of a awkward with
garages!  For a 1/4 wave, be sure you have an adequate ground plane,
at least a piece 19 inch radius.  Aluminum foil works fine, but you
need a washer or something between the antenna mount and the foil
so you do not tear it up.  Or you could use some radials made up of
pieces of aluminized tape.  Just like duct tape, 2" wide, and sold
at hardware stores.  Make a big X, drill thru the center of the X,
put a washer and then the antenna mount.  Good luck taking the
headliner off.....heh heh.

Ramon, AL7X, Nome, Alaska.  [To foil SpamBots, my e-mail address is
             not machine readable.  Reply to:   rfg.at.nome.dot.net  ]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:21 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!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: 2/3 BOBTAIL CURTAIN anyone tried ?
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 11:24:23 +0200
Organization: Kalles Surfeklubb DELUXE
Lines: 17
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-ppp7.applause.no

Found this antenna in a magazine
Anyone tried it? It should be a number of fased verticals depending of
how many vertical elements you hang on.
I have not tried it and would be glad to hear how this antenna perform.
        best 73 de LA7EJA



                1/2 wave
_________________________________  50 ohm coax here
|                                |
|                                |
|                                |
|                                |
| 1/4 wave                       | 1/4 wave
|                                |
|                                |


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:21 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.uoregon.edu!news-feed.iguide.com!delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2/3 BOBTAIL CURTAIN anyone tried ?
Date: Sun, 6 Oct 96 12:55:14 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1b.delphi.com
X-To: Karl Martin Gjestrum <[e-mail]>

Karl Martin Gjestrum <[e-mail]> writes:

>Anyone tried it? It should be a number of fased verticals depending of
>how many vertical elements you hang on.

A lot of people know this antenna as the "Half Square" sold
by Antennas West. They also have an application note on it.
It is a good low-angle, bi-directional antenna if you have
a good ground to go with it. IMO, if you don't have a good
ground, you would be better off with a delta loop like the
one I'm putting up. It requires exactly the components of
the "Half-Square" in a slightly smaller area.

       +------------------------------------+
        \                                  /
          \                              /
            \                          /
              \                      /
                \                  /
                  \              /
                    \          /
                      \      /
                        \  /
                         ++

For 40m, top section is about 64ft, sides are about 40ft.
It is fed with 50ohm coax on a side approximately 8ft
down from the top. If you put pulleys at the top ends,
you can adjust the form factor and feedpoint for optimum
results.

73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:23 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!demos!news1.relcom.ru!EU.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.myriad.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2/3 BOBTAIL CURTAIN anyone tried ?
Date: 6 Oct 1996 17:17:31 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 74
Message-ID: <538pjb$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr17s7.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <[e-mail]>, Karl Martin Gjestrum <[e-mail]> wr
ites:
>Found this antenna in a magazine
>Anyone tried it? It should be a number of fased verticals depending of
>how many vertical elements you hang on.
>I have not tried it and would be glad to hear how this antenna perform.
>       best 73 de LA7EJA
>
>
>
>               1/2 wave
>_________________________________  50 ohm coax here
>|                               |
>|                               |
>|                               |
>|                               |
>| 1/4 wave                      | 1/4 wave
>|                               |
>|                               |

I ran it off an entertainment hall jutted out into the Gulf of Mexico in Galve
ston
as part of an entry into a science fair project in high school.  That was in
1952, if my memory is right.  The pier was about 45 feet over the water,
depending of course, on the time of day and the tide.  I tied the two elements

to the wood pier piling railings and dangled them down with tools for weights
on the ends.  I fed it with coax, as you describe from a pair of 4-65a's.

Had to re-tune it during the day as the sea level rose and fell, as I recall..
.

It did a WONDERFUL job, however, as a kid at 13, I really didn't know
enough to understand exactly what salt water was worth.  Even with an
Extra Class back then, I really didn't appreciate the math, let alone the
political overtones of a good DX expedition, nor did I understand public
opinion.  I did learn a little bit about Dr. R. F. Burns and artificial ground
s
that I had to string to calm the pounding RF sea above....

It has been argued as late as yesterday that I still don't understand all
this, on all counts, for I still get burned in various ways....

The first place winner of the science fair put out only 300 watts into hi-fi
audio, where I put about the same amount into what I thought was a far
better place.  I did get a third place.... behind a medicine show.  One of the

judges took me aside afterward and said, "Son, its hard to follow a dog act!"

    :)

Extrapolating this to your question,  I'm guessing that you have a curious
top-down perspective of the ground, like I did when I got there!  My use
of the creature was out of necessity.  Are you an apartment dweller?

If so, the ground below should be much more stable than mine was.  Once
tuned up you will likely get to use it without much fiddling.

If you don't have this curious perspective of height, or something like that,
I'd feed it from the bottom as a voltage fed device from a tuner, like they
normally get fed.  No sense getting heated up over all this foolishness!

   :)

Incidentally, this is a vertical element device.  (Now, really?)  :)

That means it will interact with everything else around it that is vertical,
metal, and is either bigger or littler than it!  Bigger dogs can scent it righ
t
quick!  In the reverse, if it too close to any of your littler metal trees tha
t
think they are tough stuff, it's just a bigger dog!

Where verticals are involved, one dog is a pet; two dogs can be dogs...

    :)

//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:24 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!scnews.sc.intel.com!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2/3 BOBTAIL CURTAIN anyone tried ?
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 09:46:40 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[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)

David wrote:
> I don't have a ground system  for my version of the 20 M 1/2 SQ as shown
> in the 73 article.

Dang David, where the heck do you live that doesn't have a
ground system? :-)


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:24 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!solaris.cc.vt.edu!news.seanet.com!Gary!kc7hxc
From: [e-mail] (Gary W. Halpain)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 23-cm packet link Antenna ?????
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 22:57:02 GMT
Organization: Seanet Corp.
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kc7hxc.seanet.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4]

I am setting up a 23-cm packet link and am looking for plans of a suitable
antenna for its location.  The site will be hi in the mountains and have a lot

of ice and snow in the winter months.  I think my best choice would be either
a J-pole or a grand plane corner reflector.

If I use a J-pole I would probably make it out of 3/8 copper tubing or if I de
cide
on the corner reflector it would probably be made with stainless steel.  I
think I would like the corner reflector better for it has more gain.

Can anyone help me out with plans for either or both types of 23-cm antennas,
or does anyone have any ideas of what type of antenna would be better for this

type of application in the mountains.

de Gary / KC7HXC
kc7hxc @ seanet.com



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:25 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!charles1
From: [e-mail] (charles copeland)
Subject: 2m mobile antenna & lack of ground
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 14:11:34 GMT
Lines: 13
Sender: [e-mail]

I wonder about the SWR and efficiency of 1/4 and 5/8 wave mobile
antennas that don't have direct contacts to the cars frame.

Seems that none of these antennas have provisions to add a strap to the
chassis.

I know my HF mobile whip won't work at all without this strap.

Why don't mobile 2m antennas absolutely require the ground strap?

--
------------ Charles Copeland [e-mail] --------------



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:30 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!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!tor.istar!east.istar!news.inforamp.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Paul Cordingley)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2m mobile antenna & lack of ground
Date: 6 Oct 1996 20:55:22 GMT
Organization: In the wilds of Toronto Canada
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <5396bq$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ts38-14.tor.istar.ca
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (charles copeland) wrote:

>I wonder about the SWR and efficiency of 1/4 and 5/8 wave mobile
>antennas that don't have direct contacts to the cars frame.
>Seems that none of these antennas have provisions to add a strap to the
>chassis.
>I know my HF mobile whip won't work at all without this strap.
>Why don't mobile 2m antennas absolutely require the ground strap?

Charles,

This is a topic I'm also very interested in. I've always assumed that
mag-mount antenna designers provide for capacitive loading to the
vehicle body. I've also assumed that a less-than perfect ground, at
worst, would lead to the outer coax radiating...but since the coax is
pretty much enclosed by the car body, at VHF this has little effect on
radiation (even if it bathes the car's occupants in RF energy :) )

Recently I built a quarter-wave 2 meter antenna which clips to the
outside of the car's side window. This left me wondering what to do
about the ground side of the coax. My solution: six inches of speaker
wire attached to the coax shield, which hangs down inside the car,
with an alligator clip on the end. I attach a 12-inch brass rod to the
alligator clip, clipped in the middle of the rod, so I end up with a
T-shaped lower element.

I have no idea what undesirable electrical properties I've created,
but the antenna works wonderfully. Perhaps someone can comment?

73
Paul
VA3MLW





From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:31 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!nntp.coast.net!news00.sunet.se!sunic!mn6.swip.net!mn5.swip.net!news
From: Maude Schyffert <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2m mobile antenna & lack of ground
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 19:15:03 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup110-3-12.swipnet.se
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
NNTP-Posting-User: ca371ac9c2b9db57d345c213928e7f29
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b6Gold (Win16; I)
To: charles copeland <[e-mail]>

charles copeland wrote:
>
> I wonder about the SWR and efficiency of 1/4 and 5/8 wave mobile
> antennas that don't have direct contacts to the cars frame.

I don┤t quite see the problem, how are you going to mount the antenna ??

Grounded coax ??? or ???  a 1/2 lamba wip can bee flooting... A bit more
information is needed.


M /  SM0BKZ


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:32 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!charles1
From: [e-mail] (charles copeland)
Subject: Re: 2m mobile antenna & lack of ground
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <[e-mail]> <01bbb3e9$19b70fc0$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 16:49:59 GMT
Lines: 33
Sender: [e-mail]

In article <01bbb3e9$19b70fc0$[e-mail]>,
Harv Shore <[e-mail]> wrote:
>When you read about antennas you will find that certain configurations
>REQUIRE a ground plane and others DO NOT.  Specifically, 1/2 wave antennas
>do not want the ground plane while 1/4 and 5/8 wave do!
>
>I suggest that you pick up one of the good antenna books at your local Ham
>Shop.

Thats why I specifically mentioned 1/4 and 5/8. Both require a ground
plane but are sold as magmounts with no provision for ground straps.

>charles copeland <[e-mail]> wrote in article
><[e-mail]>...
>> I wonder about the SWR and efficiency of 1/4 and 5/8 wave mobile
>> antennas that don't have direct contacts to the cars frame.
>>
>> Seems that none of these antennas have provisions to add a strap to the
>> chassis.
>>
>> I know my HF mobile whip won't work at all without this strap.
>>
>> Why don't mobile 2m antennas absolutely require the ground strap?
>>
>> --
>> ------------ Charles Copeland [e-mail] --------------
>>
>>


--
------------ Charles Copeland [e-mail] --------------



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:32 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!feed1.news.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] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2m mobile antenna & lack of ground
Date: 7 Oct 1996 10:55:32 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 18
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <53b5l4$[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb3e9$19b70fc0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

It's a popular rumor that 1/2 wl verticals don't require a ground plane,
but not true.

All end-fed antennas require a "ground" connection as the other terminal
of the feedline, and they all require a ground plane below the antenna to
maximize gain and efficiency. The ground is necessary for two reasons. The
feedline needs a ground as the other terminal at the antenna and the
ground plane below and several wavelengths away from the antenna causes
the vertical pattern to form.

5/8 wl and 1/2 wl antennas actually require a larger groundplane (several
wavelengths in diameter) than a 1/4 wl to provide full gain, even though
the feedline connection is easier to satisfy. The capacitance of the mag
mount to the roof is usually high enough at VHF to provde a good feedpoint
ground, but the roof itself is usually too small to provide maximum gain
for the 1/2 and 5/8 wl antennas.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:33 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!news.csranet.com!usenet
From: Hal Rosser <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 300-ohm Twin-lead OK?
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 07:59:03 -0700
Organization: CSRA Internet Services
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: line048.csranet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; I)

Hi folks: I have about a 150 ft run to my vertical and run about 5w
pwr. I looked up the loss associated with different feed lines and have
decided to try 300-ohm twin-lead. (I try out my ideas on the CB bands so
if i mess up a radio it'll only cost me $30 or so.) I'm now trying out
2 of those tv transformers (75/300ohm) to get the impedence somewhat in
line.. (right now I just have two of them back-to-back testing their
reliability) they seem to work ok at 4 watts at 27 mhz.
  Question is : Has anybody tried the tv transformers at higher wattages?
and if so how high ? and how much wattage can 300-ohm twinlead take ?
  (they seem to work ok at 11 m and 4 watts, but I'm hesitant to hook my
100w HF rig up to it.) Anone have any insight on this ?
thanks Hal KT4QE
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:35 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!netcom.com!wa2ise
From: [e-mail] (Robert Casey)
Subject: Re: 300-ohm Twin-lead OK?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 20:06:56 GMT
Lines: 35
Sender: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> Hal Rosser <[e-mail]> write
s:
>Hi folks: I have about a 150 ft run to my vertical and run about 5w
>pwr. I looked up the loss associated with different feed lines and have
>decided to try 300-ohm twin-lead. (I try out my ideas on the CB bands so
>if i mess up a radio it'll only cost me $30 or so.) I'm now trying out
>2 of those tv transformers (75/300ohm) to get the impedence somewhat in
>line.. (right now I just have two of them back-to-back testing their
>reliability) they seem to work ok at 4 watts at 27 mhz.
>  Question is : Has anybody tried the tv transformers at higher wattages?
>and if so how high ? and how much wattage can 300-ohm twinlead take ?
>  (they seem to work ok at 11 m and 4 watts, but I'm hesitant to hook my
>100w HF rig up to it.) Anone have any insight on this ?
>thanks Hal KT4QE
>[e-mail]

The way these little balums are designed, most of the RF energy travels
thru two sets of transmission lines, 150 ohms each.  at the low impedance
end, the two lines are connected in parallel, making it look like 50 ohms.
At the other end, the lines are connected in series, adding up to 300 ohms.
All the ferrite core does is to choke out "common mode" currents on the
150 ohm transmission lines, and to remove the short circuit (at RF freqs)
you'd get going from parallel to series connection.

You could make your own, and maybe get a better match from 50 to 300
(most of those TV baluns do 75 to 300).  Get three ferrite cores, and
some twisted pair wire.  wrap many turns around each core, seperately
(so you have three cores, each with one twisted pair coil.  connect all
three in parallel, connecting the same color of wire (I assume your
twisted pair has different color wire in each pair, like red & white)
together (parallel).  At the other end, connect a red from one twisted pair
to a white of another twisted pair, and then the red of that twisted
pair to the white of the 3rd twisted pair.  That leaves a white from the
first twisted pair and a red from the 3rd twisted pair, 350 ohms, but
that should be colse enough to 300 ohms.  That's only 1:1.2 mismatch,
not bad.


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:36 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news.service.uci.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Brian Williams)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 9913  Max volts
Date: 6 Oct 1996 14:07:35 GMT
Organization: UCI Medical Center
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <538ef7$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialin9021.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...
>My Antenna Book doesn't give the Maximum RMS Operating Voltage
>for 9913.
>thanks and 73, Cecil, W6RCA  (not speaking for my employer)

According to Press Jones of "The Wireman" 9913 is rated at 4000
volts.

Brian - N6ZAU



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:38 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!netnews.nwnet.net!news.u.washington.edu!news.alt.net!newspost1.alt.net!usenet
From: "Peter Gottlieb" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 9913 Maximum voltage
Date: 11 Oct 1996 02:16:44 GMT
Organization: Altopia Corp. - Affordable Usenet Access - http://www.alt.net
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <01bbb71a$5aaadb40$02102399@peter-s>
References: <[e-mail]> <53imng$[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

> >
> 600 and 4000, both from reputable sources. What's a mere factor of 6+
among
> friends?
>

Maybe not so strange.  With the dielectric 9913 has I would feel relatively
comfortable with 4000 Volts DC on the cable...

Now AC is a different matter!  Obviously at high frequencies you can't
really
expect to put 600 VRMS into the cable; think of how much power this
represents
in a 50 Ohm cable ( 7200 Watts!)

So the true answer lies in the application..


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:39 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.structured.net!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx02-34
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 9913 Maximum voltage
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 96 11:30:57 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <53imng$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx02-34.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (JAMES MCEWEN) wrote:
>     I don't know if this has been posted yet,
>
>     Belden 9913, max voltage 600 V RMS, from the latest Belden
>     General Catalog.
>
>     Jim  KA6TPR
>
600 and 4000, both from reputable sources. What's a mere factor of 6+ among
friends?

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:40 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz.cv.hp.com!tomb
From: [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 9913 Maximum voltage
Date: 11 Oct 1996 18:04:34 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard Corvallis Site
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <53m27i$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hplsnb.lsid.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL9.4]

Cecil Moore ([e-mail]) wrote:
: "Peter Gottlieb" <[e-mail]> writes:
:
: >So the true answer lies in the application..
:
: Indeed it does. With an SWR of 10:1, a 600v maximum rating
: will be violated at 720 watts, assuming Vavg=SQRT(Vmax*Vmin)

(Easy way to figure this:  put the voltage max at the load,
which means it's a 500 ohm resistance.  It's 720 watts,
no assumptions needed.  Or consider forward and reflected
power, and the power which must have been dissipated in the
load.  Same answer. (Does assume lossless line, so SWR is
everywhere the same on the line.))


But--PLEASE NOTE:

600 volts leads to 7200 watts at 1:1 SWR.  But the cable won't be used
at that power level at the freqs where it's normally used (2 meters and
above) because it will MELT at anything approaching that power level.
That's because 600V/50ohms is 12 amps, and the copper resistance at the
operating frequency makes it get HOT at that current.

If the line is more than 1/4 wave long, and it has a HIGH SWR, it
will have a current maximum as well as a voltage maximum.  And with 600
volts at the voltage maximum you will have 12 amps at the current
maximum.  And you will have the same heating in the vicinity of the
current maximum as you did with 1:1 SWR.

SO:  SWR or not, the line will most likely be thermally limited even
with a 600 volt rating, if used with a power duty cycle typical of CW or
SSB (and certainly so with FM) at 2 meters and above.


(Guess it's possible to get to short enough wavelengths that the high
thermal conductivity of the copper center conductor will conduct
heat away from the current maximum point; but if you are operating
at freqs that high, the loss is bad enough that the thermal limit is
at a much lower current!)

(There's a bunch of basic RF transmission line physics that's good to
keep in proper perspective when thinking about things like power
handling.  I don't mean to pick on Cecil particularly about this, but
when I see the perspective lost when only part of the system is
considered, I feel I must speak up.  I'm distressed that an article
about transmission lines in a recent RF engineering journal had many
similar sins of omission and some accompanying mistakes.  This stuff
has all been known a long time; Terman covers much of it in "Radio
Engineers' Handbook".  But the word never seems to get out.)

--
Cheers,
Tom
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:41 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-4.sprintlink.net!news2.whytel.com!usenet
From: john fleenor <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna Projects
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 09:57:22 -0700
Organization: Why? Network   [phone]
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.240.253.41
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; U)

visit john's ham page at http://www.why.net/home/jlfleenor for web page
graphics, ham software, ham links, electronic projects, antenna projects
and more!


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:42 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!sun4nl!dataweb.net!Leiden.NL.net!Utrecht.NL.net!news.worldaccess.nl!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antw: Re: Re: Antw: What if I trim the dipole to fit (or: SWR &
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 96 13:21:51 GMT
Organization: Not organized at all ! ! !
Lines: 87
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
 <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lwd1-8.worldaccess.nl
X-Newsreader: Quarterdeck Message Center [1.1]

Cecil Moore wrote:

> .....

> What happened is you forgot to state some boundary conditions for
> your statement. When that happens, someone will always jump in to
> set the record straight. If you hang around the newsgroup, you will
> no doubt, get to do the same thing for me.

Sorry for being mistaken! I thought the idea of this newsgroup is to answer th
e
question of someone. Now it looks more like trying to find ways to correct an
other person. Some might just try to answer the question without a 100 percent

legal coverage of all possible, imaginable and complex (=real+imaginable)
situations.

When I take another look at the original question from [e-mail]:

> I'm setting up a 160-10 meter dipole but was a little too optimistic
> about the length from one corner of my little city lot to the other.
> The wire is now 134' long and about 14' too long to fit comfortably.
> My choices seem to be:
>
> 1) Erect a pole on the roof of my house to raise the center into an
> inverted V and take up the slack that way.  It would be a bend of some 30
> degrees, not 90!
>
> 2) snip those 14' right off (along with any hope for 160 meter contacts?).
> .....

I still think my remark about SWR in this case is still right. It is after all

an answer to the question asked. The main drive for answering for me was that
lot's of amateurs are really really really concerned if the (in most cases:
cheap) SWR-meter does not indicate a 1:1 ratio.

A liitle correction for the corrector:
>
> IMO, if it is physically feasible to use ladder-line, coax cannot
> be economically justified for long runs at high SWRs.
>
> 73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC

AGREE on the ECONOMICAL part for AMATEURS, since a good coax cable will cost
you here in the Netherlands about $7..20 per yard and these are prices the
average amateur is reluctant to pay, especially since a much cheaper
alternative to him is available: open line = ladder - line.

But quoting a certain Cecil Moore:

> What happened is you forgot to state some boundary conditions for
> your statement. When that happens, someone will always jump in to
> set the record straight. If you hang around the newsgroup, you will
> no doubt, get to do the same thing for me.
(recognise it from the start?)

You are NOT RIGHT. You forgot ti state some boundery conditions:
Aboard militairy ships in our Navy there is NO WAY open-line or ladder-line
would be 'economically justified', because a lot of other price-driving
restrictions apply using ladder-line. The fact is: aboard our Navy ships ALL
HF-cabling is in fact COAX and the lenghts we are talking about are varying
from 30 to sometime 80 meters running length.

I conducted a study some time ago and looking for the open line alternative,
but this was ruled out, mainly on ECONOMICAL GROUNDS, for shipboard use.

End of discussion?

P.S.: I did not recalculate the loss due to SWR=17 in your example, but your
comments noted both '6 dB' and '75 percent loss in coax cable', so it made
sense to me the 6 dB was the total of loss.

Greetings,

----
+-----------------------------------+
|  Henk                             |
|      'Hank Panthouse'             |
|                  Broekhuizen      |
|  P A 3 B L P                      |
+-----------------------------------+
|     email: [e-mail]    |
+-----------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------+
| It's better to burn up,           |
|            than to fade away      |
+-----------------------------------+



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:43 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!scnews.sc.intel.com!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antw: Re: Re: Antw: What if I trim the dipole to fit (or: SWR &
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 09:42:44 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
         <[e-mail]> <[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)

[e-mail] wrote:
> I still think my remark about SWR in this case is still right.

And here's your remark, the only one I disagreed with:

>There is still a lot of confusion about SWR <> 1, but for HF
>there is simply no discussion neccesary, since losses from
>standing waves are neglectably low.

If you had said "usually negligibly low" I would not have responded.
Lots of newer hams get their antenna knowlege from this newsgroup.
We can't have them believing that you meant "always negligibly low".

> You are NOT RIGHT. You forgot to state some boundery conditions:

See, I was right. You did get to do the same thing for me. :-)

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


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:44 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news-m01.ny.us.ibm.net!news-s01.ca.us.ibm.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antw: What if I trim the dipole to fit
Date: 10 Oct 1996 14:40:13 GMT
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <53j1sd$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip129-37-242-107.ca.us.ibm.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <[e-mail]>, Cecil Moore <[e-mail]> writes
:
>
>We must be careful about blanket statements. "Negligible losses"
>means different things to different people. Each person needs
>to estimate their losses and decide for themselves whether it
>is negligible or not.
>
>73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC

Yes, I had an almost identical discussion with a fellow who was using
an 80M dipole as an all-band antenna by means of a transmatch.  In this
case, unless I am mistaken, his SWR was probably about 50/1 on some
bands, although his XCVR would put out full power since the match between
the COAX and the **RIG** was 50ohms.

He commented that, Gee, I work lots of stations with this antenna on
40, 20 and 15 meters.  My guess is that he was losing about 90% of his
transmitted output.  Of course, we all know that you can work lots of stations
with QRP.

Roger J. Buffington
W6VZV
[e-mail]

USC Law School, Class of '97

--------------------------------------------------
"I want to die peacefully, in my sleep, like my Grandfather."
"Not screaming, and in terror, like his passengers."
--------------------------------------------------



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:45 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!gatech!csulb.edu!news.sgi.com!enews.sgi.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!sun4nl!baan.nl!Utrecht.NL.net!news.worldaccess.nl!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Re: Antw: What if I trim the dipole to fit (or: SWR & Loss)
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 96 22:32:03 GMT
Organization: Not organized at all ! ! !
Lines: 81
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
 <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lwd2-9.worldaccess.nl
X-Newsreader: Quarterdeck Message Center [1.1]

[e-mail] wrote in response to one of my messages:

> <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> >There is still a lot of confusion about SWR <> 1, but for HF there is simpl
y
> no
> >discussion neccesary, since losses from standing waves are neglectably low.

>
> Let's take a case where the above statement is not true. Someone
> a few days ago, wanted to use a coax-fed 20m half-wave dipole as
> an all band antenna. I modeled it on 10m and EZNEC said an SWR of
> 17:1. With 100ft of RG-58 that would result in about 6dB of
> attenuation, or 75% of the power lost in the coax. Granted, it is
> only about 1.5 'S' units but not "negligibly low" IMO.
>
> We must be careful about blanket statements. "Negligible losses"
> means different things to different people. Each person needs
> to estimate their losses and decide for themselves whether it
> is negligible or not.
>
> 73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC

FIRST OF ALL:
My original answer was written with the orignal question and case in mind
(should I snip off pieces of the antenna to improve SWR). My remark was relate
d
to the question asked.

The discussion part of my response was: 'losses from standing waves'.
The calculation of Cecil W6RCA shows the losses in the transmission line are 6

dB. My remark was about 'losses from standing waves', this loss is 3 dB.

In Cecil's example the choice of transmission line is RG58!. The attenuation o
f
this line at 30 MHz is according to REF 1 page 24-41 about 3 dB (with perfect
SWR), so not very good for the length it is being used. The effect of the high

SWR causes the (total) attenuation to be as if the coax is double as long.

If the creator of the dipole would be using a good coax cable for 30 MHz, he
probably would be wise to choose something like RG213, 214, 215 or 216 or RG 1
1
or 12 (about 1.2 dB per 100 feet at 30 MHz). An even better, but more
expensive, choice would be RG218 or 219 (about 0.5 dB per 100 feet on 30 MHz).

Another alternative is the use of open line (since these have low losses).

The problem according to me in Cecil's example is not the high SWR, but the
wrong choice of feeder line. With a better choice (like RG218 or RG219 or open

line) this could be 1 dB (with the same high SWR of 1:17!).

AGREE, Cecil W6RCA is right about blanket statements, and mine could have used

a little bit more shading because it reflects this case and not all possible
thinkable cases. I apologise if someone is misled by that remark.


A LAST REMARK:
Please also remember that high SWR can cause extra high voltages on your
transmission line, so RG58 will be underrated for voltage at high SWR!
The maximum power at 30 MHz for a RG58 is a mere 350 Watts (REF 1 page 24-42),

and this is reduced by higher SWR (because of higher voltages).
At high ambient temperatures (cables in the sun for instance) like 60 degrees
Celcius there is a derating factor of 0.46, so the maximum power at SWR=1 is
only about 160 Watts.
So my advice is: do not use RG58 for this application but use a real coax!

REF1: Reference data for radio engineers, Howard W. Sams & Co (sub from ITT),
ISBN 0-672-21218-8, second print, 1977, page 24-41 and 24-42

Kind regards,
----
+-----------------------------------+
|  Henk                             |
|      'Hank Panthouse'             |
|                  Broekhuizen      |
|  P A 3 B L P                      |
+-----------------------------------+
|     email: [e-mail]    |
+-----------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------+
| It's better to burn up,           |
|            than to fade away,     |
|  So please pass me the dummy !    |
+-----------------------------------+



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:46 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!news.eunet.fi!jjo
From: [e-mail] (Jari Jokiniemi)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Any 30/40 meter yagis
Date: 07 Oct 1996 05:49:09 GMT
Lines: 5
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ds10.tekla.fi


Are there any 30/40 meter dualband yagis available?
--
Jari Jokiniemi, [e-mail], OH2MPO, OH3BU
Tekla Oy, Koronakatu 1, 02210 Espoo, 90-8879 474


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:47 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!enews.sgi.com!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!nntp.earthlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-ana-24.sprintlink.net!ratty.wolfe.net!usenet
From: Ramon Gandia <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Anybody built a 2M "J-Pipe" antenna before?
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 1996 23:10:03 -0800
Organization: Anvil Technology
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <53455u$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: nome-ts1-p03.nome.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
To: [e-mail]

Tony White wrote:
>
> I ran across a design for a 2M jpole that uses copper pipe instead of 300-oh
m
> twinlead that I really liked.  I'm going to go ahead and build it.  I was ju
st
> wondering, though, whether anybody here had built one before and if you had
> any comments on performance or suggestions on construction..

The one I built I used a half wave radiator for the radiator portion.

I used a 10 ft piece of 3/4-inch copper pipe, and a few scraps to
make it up.  I cut the ten footer 58 inches from the top end and
inserted a tee with the leg pointing sideways.  I put a 3" stub of
copper pipe, then an elbow pointing up, and then another scrap of
pipe going up.  The short leg, from the base of the J thus formed
is 19 inches; the long leg is 58 inches or so, and 39 inches
from the top of the short leg to the tip of the antenna.  It would not
hurt to make this long leg an inch or so longer so you can trim it.
The remaining copper pipe goes at the bottom of the tee, to serve as
a mast.

Attach the coax, shield to the long leg, inner conductor to the short
leg, about 6 inches up from the bottom of the J.  This is the easiest
way as the coax can be taped to the copper pipe.

Solder your connections, and then also add a hose clamp to each.  I
soldered mine with a torch and plumber's no-core solder, but I used
non corrosive flux (plumber's too).

Adjust the coax tap for minimum swr.  You should get zero reflected
power.  If not, try trimming the long pipe a bit, like 1/4 or 1/2
inch and see if there is any improvement.  I had no problem with mine
and it came down to zero reflected power on my Bird Meter.

The reason you may need to trim the pipe is that it is the devil of
a job to get the coax tap, solder and all to fall in the exact spot.
If the pipe ends up being too short, and you need to add, put a
copper splice and a bit more pipe.  I capped both my pipes to keep
water out.  You can guy the antenna at the bottom of the J, even with
metal guy wires and the swr will not move a flicker.

My antenna was for 146.94, to go on a mountain here in Alaska, so it
had to be tough.  I took a copperclad steel rod, 1/2 inch, and shoved
it up from the bottom to strenthen the area around the tee.  It was
8 ft long, and is a common item at electrical supply houses where they
are sold as ground rods for electrical services.

The antenna works very well, nil reflected power, and radiates
pretty much omnidirectionally but seems to favor the direction
in the plane of the J by maybe a hair.  In our case, we have the
long pipe in back and the short pipe towards the area we wish to
best cover.  Not much difference, though, but noticeable.  (We did
the test with an attenuator so the signal was NOT full quieting
so we could test it by ear.

Ramon.  AL7X, Nome, Alaska  [to foil SpamBots, my e-mail address is
              not machine readable.  Reply to:  rfg.at.nome.dot.net  ]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:51 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!news3.agis.net!agis!NEWS!not-for-mail
From: Bob Lewis <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Anyone ever use a utility pole for a tower?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 11:53:19 -0400
References: <533tvs$[e-mail]> <01bbb285$133d4e80$944692cf@default> <[e-mail]>
Organization: AA4PB
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 36

Joel S Gamble wrote:
>
> DAVE ABSHIRE wrote:
> >
> > Hi Phil
> > I use three of them now. I have two 70 footers and a 35 foot one. But I us
e
> > the 35 footer to raise and lower the 70ft tower. Man thats a lot of money
> > for a pole. I got mine for $60.00 each for the 70's and 20 for the 35ft
> > one. But then again I guess it depends on where you are. I live in Florida
> > and there seemed to be a lot of them in my area 2 years ago. These are use
d
> > though. But its still cheaper than buying a tower or two. I think the
> > prices you were quoted are very high. I set these poles myself with a
> > backhoe and a old ford 8n tractor if you know what that is, (1948) model.
> >
> >                                                         Dave
> > > I want to get a wooden utility pole to use as an
> > > antenna tower.  Seems to me it could be a good deal
> > > stronger than the typical steel ham tower. Could have
> > > a micro-shack right up there.
> > >
> > > Has anyone ever done this?
> > > Any good advice?
> > >
> > > I've been quoted prices in the $250 to $1100 range,
> > > (which prices naturally do not include shipping or installation!)
> > > so that's reasonable.
> > >
> > >
> > > What say you?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Phil Roban n0etx
>    Probably have less invested in the pole AND tractor than a good 70'
> tower would cost!! ;<)
>                    Ko4qCYou priced tractors (or labor costs) recently?



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:52 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.orst.edu!v_mail.supra.com!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!spstimes.sps.mot.com!newsdist.sps.mot.com!newsgate.sps.mot.com!usenet
From: Jim <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Anyone ever use a utility pole for a tower?
Date: 7 Oct 1996 20:03:23 GMT
Organization: IdeaSource
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <53bnmb$[e-mail]>
References: <5366uf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 222.229.249.54
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.12(Macintosh; I; PPC)
X-URL: news://newsgate/5366uf$[e-mail]

Depending on who provides your electricity, you might be able to
get the utility company out to set a pole for a reasonable cost.

I'd try asking for a pole for a security light.  In rural areas
especially, the electrical utilities like to sell electricity
that's used at night but not during the day.  It helps level the
load on the grid, and they don't have to spin the generators up
and down as much.

The last person I heard of doing this got his pole installed
for a total cost under $100 -- though that was 10 years ago,
you should be able to get a comparable price today.

N6OTQ




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:53 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!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, 06 Oct 96 16:34:20 GMT
Organization: Not Enough
Lines: 21
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <538n68$[e-mail]>
References: <523rsu$[e-mail]> <527l7h$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
>[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>I'm deleting most of what you wrote, because it is your opinion
>of what I said, rather than quotes of what I really said.

You have not been misquoted and I am tired of defending myself
against this complaint.  You have used it several times now to
dismiss my comments, and to simultaneously avoid the necessity
of responding to them.  It is not possible to continue a
rational discussion under these conditions.

For the record, I'll refer one last time to your statement "If
we measured the current at b and d and it was not equal and
opposite, the line would radiate."  You have made this claim
repeatedly throughout this discussion, and I will say again
that it is nonsensical when it is applied to coax.  Currents
inside coaxial line are *always* equal and opposite.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:54 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sgi.com!swrinde!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.uoregon.edu!news.u.washington.edu!news.alt.net!news1.alt.net!news.aa.net!ratty.wolfe.net!usenet
From: Ramon Gandia <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BALUN necessary for a dipole
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 22:08:49 -0800
Organization: Anvil Technology
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <523rsu$[e-mail]> <527l7h$[e-mail]> <538n68$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: nome-ts1-p01.nome.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

WB3U wrote:
>
>    [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
> >[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:
>
> >I'm deleting most of what you wrote, because it is your opinion
> >of what I said, rather than quotes of what I really said.
>
> You have not been misquoted and I am tired of defending myself
> against this complaint.  You have used it several times now to
> dismiss my comments, and to simultaneously avoid the necessity
> of responding to them.  It is not possible to continue a
> rational discussion under these conditions.
>
> For the record, I'll refer one last time to your statement "If
> we measured the current at b and d and it was not equal and
> opposite, the line would radiate."  You have made this claim
> repeatedly throughout this discussion, and I will say again
> that it is nonsensical when it is applied to coax.  Currents
> inside coaxial line are *always* equal and opposite.


True enough inside the coax.  But when a dipole is fed with coax,
the current in the dipole arms is not equal.  The difference in
current basically flows on the outside of the coax shield, radiating
(or picking up).

A balun corrects this.  Or, the current in the outside could be
isolated with a foil bazooka, ferrite beads, a chunk of copper pipe,
or, my favorite, just coil up the coax for 7 to 10 turns, about
8 inches diameter.  Scramble wound is ok, but works better if
you wrap it on a form and epoxy it.  Also, a few turns of the coax
about a large toroid will work too.

The radiation is really of no consequence, except, in areas of RFI,
where a TV set could get disturbed; or if the coax goes by a noisy
place, the ham rig will pick up the noise.  If the coax goes to a
beam, the pattern will be skewed and the f/b ratio ruined.  All of
these problems are cured by a balun or one of the contraptions
mentioned above.

Ramon, AL7X   [ To foil SpamBots, my address is not machine readable.
Nome, Alaska  [ Please e-mail me at:   rfg.at.nome.dot.net


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:55 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.orst.edu!gateway.sequent.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best antenna for 40M DX
Date: Sun, 6 Oct 96 12:28:27 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1b.delphi.com
X-To: Karl Martin Gjestrum <[e-mail]>

Karl Martin Gjestrum <[e-mail]> writes:

>What is the best wire dx antenna for 40M (have plenty of trees and

Hi Karl, your question cannot be answered until you tell us
what kind of radiation pattern you want. If it is single
direction the answer will be different than if it is
omni-directional. Also the answer depends on whether
you have a good ground or not.

73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:56 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!news.tek.com!netman.ens.tek.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Terry Burge)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Best antenna for 80M DX
Date: 9 Oct 1996 15:54:04 -0700
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton, OR, USA
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <53haec$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: netman.ens.tek.com

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>What is the best wire dx antenna for 80M (have plenty of trees and
>space).

Slopers. Heard a guy on last night running 1/2 wavelength slopers, a set
of 5 spaced around a 97 foot tower. They worked real well. He used 75 feet
of RG-8X to a switchbox on the tower and when one was selected the others
are open and hopefully appear to be reflectors.(or at least not to
interfere) Watching on my FT1000MP s-meter I could see 2 1/2 S-units
(about 12 1/2 to 15 dbs) of difference between the one towards me and
the 'worst case' one slooping the other direction.

Seems like if you have the height and some room you can't go too far
wrong with these for the amount of effort required to put them up. Easier
than stringing 60-1/4 wavelength radials for a vertical to get it to start
working right. Wish I had the height.

Second idea would be 1/4 wavelength vertical with 4 radials suspended
by a rope IF you have enough height to get the radials 15 or more feet
above the ground (ground plane style). Get one working good and then
maybe start phasing a couple or build a 4 square.

Terry



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:56 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!enews.sgi.com!news.sgi.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!nntp.earthlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-ana-24.sprintlink.net!ratty.wolfe.net!usenet
From: Ramon Gandia <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Birds on the Beam
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 1996 22:41:35 -0800
Organization: Anvil Technology
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb064$2e30f840$70c32ace@redoutey> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: nome-ts1-p03.nome.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

altavoz wrote:
_______________________________________-
> Fishing line or other nylon/dacron line < 1/16"
> about 3 to 4 inches above the horizontal elements
> and parallel to it .

This is what us sailboaters use to keep the birds off the rigging.
It works.   Plastic owls, pinwheels, noisemakers, etc. only work
for a while, then the birds come back.  Once back, the word is out,
it seems, because they ALL come back.

Ramon, AL7X.  reply to:  rfg.at.nome.dot.net  [not machine radable to
                                                keep SpamBots out!]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:58 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!ix.netcom.com!news
From: KD1YV <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Birds on the Beam
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 23:44:27 -0300
Organization: Hamily !
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb064$2e30f840$70c32ace@redoutey>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dby-ct2-20.ix.netcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun Oct 06 10:47:52 PM CDT 1996
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win16; I)

Richard G. Redoutey wrote:
>
> I'm looking for a solution ... I've had a problem with birds ( mostly
> pigeons ) on the beam. They sit up there in large numbers, and leave a mess
> on my patio, pool, and what else happens to be under the tower. Any SERIOUS
> suggestions as how to keep them away would be appreciated. E-MAIL reply
> would be best... [e-mail]
> Rick - WA8UMT

Well, this has certainly turned into an interesting thread to read.

No personal experience, but I read somewhere (maybe here, years ago) that
loose-fitting plastic tubing slipped over the elements is effective.  When the
bird lands on the tubing, "gravity works", the tubing spins so the bird is now
upside-down, and pretty well instantly lets go to fly away in search of a more
secure perch.

Of course, the insulating effect may cause your antenna to require slight
re-tuning, but you decide if it's worth the effort.

Your mileage may vary (Say, what's metric for "mileage?")

--
73 de Jim, KD1YV


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:58 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!cencore!forrest.gehrke
From: [e-mail] (FORREST GEHRKE)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Birds on the Beam
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 96 16:25:00 -0300
Distribution: world
Organization: Central Core BBS, 201-575-8991
Reply-To: [e-mail] (FORREST GEHRKE)
References: <01bbb3e9$19b70fc0$[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: PCBoard Version 15.22
X-Mailer: PCBoard/UUOUT Version 1.20
Lines: 16

ML> The owl bit suggested seems to actually work somewhat.   The Catholi
ML> Church here locally has used plastic owls for years to discourage ot
ML> from fouling the priests' quarters.

OK.  But what about live owls?  I have a great horned owl who
spends most of the night perched on my 20M beam hooting through
the night.  How to discourage this bird?

A local birder says the reason they do this is because my
beam is the highest available perch around.

The droppings consist of small rodent bones and fur!!
//
  k2bt

 * RM 1.3 02583 *


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:47:59 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.mindspring.com!mindspring!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.icanect.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Terry Simonds)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Birds on the Beam
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 17:37:22 GMT
Organization: Icanect
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <53lf0l$[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb064$2e30f840$70c32ace@redoutey>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.142.166.34
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

"Richard G. Redoutey" <[e-mail]> wrote:

->I'm looking for a solution ... I've had a problem with birds (
mostly
->pigeons ) on the beam. They sit up there in large numbers, and leave
a mess
->on my patio, pool, and what else happens to be under the tower. Any
SERIOUS
->suggestions as how to keep them away would be appreciated. E-MAIL
reply
->would be best... [e-mail]
->Rick - WA8UMT

Rick--

I had the same problem! Five rows of crap every morning!! I went to a
marine-supply store and got a plastic owl for about $15. It drove the
birds nuts for the first 2-3 days, then they went elsewhere. We use
them to keep gulls and birds off boats, particlularly off the
spreaders up on the masts of sailboats!! Try it! The price is right!

Good luck--   Terry in Ft. Lauderdale



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:00 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!nntp.uio.no!nntp-oslo.UNINETT.no!nntp-trd.UNINETT.no!troll.powertech.no!usenet
From: Karl Martin Gjestrum <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: carolina windom ?
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 10:49:05 +0200
Organization: Kalles Surfeklubb DELUXE
Lines: 7
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-ppp7.applause.no

Anybody running this antenna?
How does it perform ?
Wuold you recommend me to put it up.
What is the difference between the standard fd-4 and the carolina
windom?

Best 73 de LA7EJA


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:01 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!news.structured.net!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx07-26
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Choking Ladder-Line
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 96 00:25:15 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <53mof7$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx07-26.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <[e-mail]>,
   Cecil Moore <[e-mail]> wrote:
>This is probably a stupid question. I've used toroids to measure the
>current flowing in ladder-line. Depending on how the wire is threaded
>through the toroid, I could measure either differential or common mode
>currents since one or the other cancelled in the toroid internal fields.
>
>Can I choke the common mode current without affecting the differential
>current simply by passing the ladder-line through a toroidal core like
>the common mode current is choked by passing coax through a toroidal core?
>Seems the differential current fields would cancel in the toroid and the
>common mode current fields would not cancel?
>
>We have a balun (BALanced/UNbalanced), an unun (UNbalanced/UNbalanced),
>- is there such a toroidal device as a balbal (BALanced/BALanced)?
>What happens if one simply wraps turns of ladder-line on a toroid?
>
>thanks and 73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)

Cecil, instead of asking, why don't you give it a try and tell us what
happens?

Roy Lewallen, W7EL
Charter member, OFC
I speak for my employer.


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:02 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news-m01.ny.us.ibm.net!newsfeed.uk.ibm.net!tomb.env.cz!root
From: jonathan Bowes <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Coax run lengths
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 10:49:48 -0700
Organization: Czech Ecological Institute
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.168.12.59
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)

Dear all,

I have just purchased a specifically cut Civ/Mil airband antenna. It
performs very well indeed. It is the model AIR-33 from Haydon Comm in
London, UK. However, here is Prague I live in a block of flats so the
antenna is presently sitting in my bedroom on the desk. Obviously not
the optimal location for it to do its job ! I would like to put it on
the roof BUT the distance between the scanner and the antenna could be
between 20-30m. I am wondering about significant signal loss through the
long coax run. I have higher quality cable. Anyone got any ideas or
thoughts ??????

Thanks for your time.
--
**********************************************************************
Jonathan Bowes                              Czech Ecological Institute
Environmental Scientist &                           Kaplanova 1931 / 1
GIS Specialist                                        Praha - 4 Chodov
                                                                148 00
E-mail: [e-mail]                                    CZECH REPUBLIC
                                                Tel: [phone]
Institute Homepage: Http://www.ceu.cz                         67994210
Ministry of Environ. : Http://www.env.cz
**********************************************************************


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:03 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!nntp.uio.no!nntp.zit.th-darmstadt.de!fu-berlin.de!news.dfn.de!news.dkrz.de!dscomsa.desy.de!mint2!lopez
From: [e-mail] (Gerald Lopez)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: commercial 6-meter quads -> ??
Date: 10 Oct 1996 13:52:16 GMT
Organization: DESY
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <53iv2h$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mint2.desy.de
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

I'd be interested to hear which direction you would go for a
commercial, 2 element, 6-meter quad. Cubex or Bandmaster ?
Any preferences ? Please let me know - by e-mail if you like
thanks,
           gerry - DD5AX - [e-mail]

<<<---=============**********%%%%%%**********=============--->>>
Gerald C. Lopez,        DESY:  - MKI            Notkestrasse 85,
                        22603 Hamburg,                  Germany.
Tel: [phone] (Fax-2779)     E-mail: [e-mail]
<<<---=============**********%%%%%%**********=============--->>>


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:04 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Current loop in open-circuit braid
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 96 16:34:39 GMT
Organization: Not Enough
Lines: 18
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <538n6r$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <524tfb$[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:
  >WB3U wrote:

>> 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.

I've read it, but with the same result - the "through the
shield" theory is flawed because the "equal voltage" concept is
is untrue.  I've provided multiple reasonings for this (twice),
with no response.  Can you reconcile my statements with the
theory, or do you agree there's a problem?

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:06 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.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: Current loop in open-circuit braid
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 12:12:03 -0700
Organization: none
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <524tfb$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <538n6r$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-107.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:
>
> I've read it, but with the same result - the "through the
> shield" theory is flawed because the "equal voltage" concept is
> is untrue.  I've provided multiple reasonings for this (twice),
> with no response.  Can you reconcile my statements with the
> theory, or do you agree there's a problem?

Jack, (and all others), with all due respect, I do not want to argue
about this subject any more. I have thought about it *very* carefully for
many weeks and I believe my final analysis is correct in every detail. I
have not asked anyone to agree with it. As a student of Electromagnetics
Engineering for almost a half century, it agrees with my best
understandings. I would really prefer to drop this thread, and I will
respect your right to your own opinions.

Bill W0IYH


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:06 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!newspump.sol.net!news.mindspring.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!nntp.newsfirst.com!nntp.crosslink.net!news.magicnet.net!news.cdsnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-3.sprintlink.net!crunch.Telcel.net.VE!newsmasters
From: "Jorge E. Forero M." <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Cushcraft AP8
Date: 6 Oct 1996 20:03:22 GMT
Organization: YV6EDA
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <01bbb406$279fad00$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.48.40.182
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

Hello dear OM┤s:
I have one of this antenna and I loss part of de manual. I want mount my
AP8 again and I need the start mesurements for matching each band.
I apreciate any help.
Thanks in advance and please :( excuse my pour english.
--
Jorge E. Forero M.
ax.25 : yv6eda@yv6esd.#yvnet.poz.ven
e-mail : [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:07 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsgate.compuserve.com!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: Merv Stump <[e-mail]@postoffice.worldnet.att.net>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: delta loops
Date: 10 Oct 1996 13:17:15 GMT
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <53it0r$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53im0e$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 162.middletown-59.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)

Cecil, I've tried this with square loops and a corner feed does infact
outperform a center feed from the east coast into the Pacific.  Into
Europe I'd say they are about even.

Regards, Merv



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:08 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.structured.net!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx02-34
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: delta loops
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 96 11:18:38 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <53im0e$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx02-34.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <[e-mail]>,
   Cecil Moore <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Most of the delta loops I've ever seen are fed in the geometrical
>center resulting in horizontal polarization. I've done some modeling
>with EZNEC that sez a 40ft high 40m delta loop fed in the center has a
>take-off-angle of about 75 degrees. Feeding it at a side vertex results
>in vertical polarization and a take-off-angle of about 18 degrees,
>good for DX, according to EZNEC.
>
>73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)

Be careful with reducing a three-dimensional antenna pattern to a single
number (takeoff angle). The "takeoff angle" reported by EZNEC is simply the
elevation angle at which the field strength is maximum. It has nothing to
do with the ability to work DX. I've modeled plenty of low dipoles with
takeoff angles near straight up that have greater gain at ten degrees
or lower elevation than verticals with takeoff angles in the 20's. The
salient question is what the relative gains are at 10, 5, or fewer degrees
elevation. The answer varies a lot with height and with ground
characteristics.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:09 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: delta loops
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 10:15:37 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53im0e$[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)

Roy Lewallen wrote:
> Be careful with reducing a three-dimensional antenna pattern to a single
> number (takeoff angle).

Hi Roy, you're right as usual. The side-fed vertically polarized delta
loop and the center-fed horizontally polarized delta loop have equal gains
of 3dBi at a TOA of 25deg. Above 25deg, the center-fed is better. Below
25deg, the side-fed is better (for DX).

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


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:10 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!tezcat!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsgate.compuserve.com!newsmaster
From: Jason Charles <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Discone antenna
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 15:21:26 -0500
Organization: CompuServe Incorporated
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hd06-129.compuserve.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I)

I am new to Amateur Radio, and I have yet to put up an antenna. A freind
suggested a Discone from Radio Shack. I live in an apartment and have
very limlited space to put up an antenna so this choice sounds good
but... I am going to be transmitting on 2 meters only, and don't need a
Multi-band antenna @ $65. I am wondering would a simple Dipole be good
enough to get out to all the repeaters or do I need a yagi? I guess I
could expiriment and see for myself but thought maybe someone would
already have a good answer. Thanks!

Jason


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:11 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!gatech!csulb.edu!news.sgi.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] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Goodbye
Date: 7 Oct 1996 22:05:40 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 16
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <53cctk$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Ken--

I DON"T think you are faking this and I wish you well in your long
recovery. Reminds me of KA1UTE who fell off a ladder (cleaning his
gutters) and shattered his foot.

I know that doesn't help much; I just hope you might be able to someday
enjoy ham radio again and accept the event as a tragic accident--not your
fault or your hobby's. After all, you could have fallen off cleaning
gutters.

I pray your speedy return to normalcy.

73

Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:15 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.i2020.net!root
From: "Pat Wilson" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Goodbye to Burt Too.
Date: 12 Oct 1996 00:34:48 GMT
Organization: Pat's Place
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <01bbb7d4$934457a0$4f01e8cc@PW>
References: <[e-mail]> <53bo2s$[e-mail]> <01bbb4ae$3f327080$720f2399@peter-s> <53dsd4$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: onramp4-15.i2020.net
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29848 rec.radio.swap:90879 rec.radio.cb:36356

Too bad he didn't fall on Burt Fisher.  Then we would have gotten rid of
one more whiner.  Blaming his carelessness on ham radio.    What's next?

Rich & Katy Mulvey <[e-mail]> wrote in article
<[e-mail]>...
> On Fri, 11 Oct 1996 02:14:56 GMT, I hate Spam <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >[e-mail] (James M Quillian) wrote:
> >
> >>ok kennyboy everybody feels sorry for you
> >>do you feel better knowing you bummed out my day
> >>with your sad story? STAY OFF THE ROOF!.
> >>YOU SOUND LIKE A LIBERAL.
> >
> >
> >At least he is not sounding like a "conservative".  He did not try to
> >con us out of our money by saying we should be personally responsible
> >for his error.
> >
>
>
>    Ahem - the conservative philosophy dicates that people take
> personal responsibility for their actions.  The Liberal philosophy is the
> one that claims that society as a whole is responsible for assuming
> the burden of caring for the welfare of individuals.
>
> - Rich
>
>


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:15 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!swrinde!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Honest Joe)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Goodbye.
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 1996 03:31:44 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mem-tn6-15.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Mon Oct 07 10:32:33 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/16.227
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24525 rec.radio.swap:73840 rec.radio.cb:30963

Fortunate for you it was just a fall. You could have got hold of a
"hot" wire up there messing around your antenna, and there would be
nothing left but sad singing and slow riding.


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:19 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!swrinde!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!metro.atlanta.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-10.sprintlink.net!ratty.wolfe.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Alan Burgstahler)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Goodbye.
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 14:46:05 GMT
Organization: Wolfe Internet Access, L.L.C.
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <53b53g$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sea-ts6-p23.wolfenet.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24573 rec.radio.swap:73940 rec.radio.cb:30996

Ken Bessler <[e-mail]> wrote:

>On monhdaY September 30th, I was critically injured when falling some
>1-1/2 stories while trying to adjust the guy line on my Cushcrafh HF
>verticall. I just got out of the hospitall today. I have to go back in opn
>monday to get my face ro constructed. I have lost the use of my lweft eye
>because I managed to land head first on a cinder block. The damage was quite
>bad, including some peralisis <sp> of the left side of my bnody. My nose id
>GONE. My kids (4) are scared of me now! is this hobby worth it? no.

First, I'm glad you survived.  Sounds like a very scary thing to happen to you
.
Second, you can get killed crossing the street or driving your car, or falling
off a ladder while working on your house, and a million other ways.  The thing
is to do things safely.  I'm sorry you had such an experience, but many people
dabble in ham radio all their lives and never have such a close call with
death or even serious injury from it.  However, I can certainly understand you
r
feeling of getting away from it after having such a scare.  Hope you do better
and are feeling better soon.


Alan Burgstahler - WA6AWD - Kent, WA, USA



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:20 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!newsfeed.concentric.net!news-master!news
From: Joel S Gamble <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Goodbye.
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 1996 02:04:49 -0700
Organization: Concentric Internet Services
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: cnc083041.concentric.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24576 rec.radio.swap:73949 rec.radio.cb:31000

Ken Bessler wrote:
>
> (please excuse anty spelling mistakes due to h9gh dosages if pain killers ad
> severe visdion pr4oblems)
>
> I have4 had several hobnbies im my 32 years and one of them was Amateur
> radio. On monhdaY September 30th, I was critically injured when falling some
> 1-1/2 stories while trying to adjust the guy line on my Cushcrafh HF
> verticall. I just got out of the hospitall today. I have to go back in opn
> monday to get my face ro constructed. I have lost the use of my lweft eye
> because I managed to land head first on a cinder block. The damage was quite
> bad, including some peralisis <sp> of the left side of my bnody. My nose id
> GONE. My kids (4) are scared of me now! is this hobby worth it? no.
>
> Moral of the story:
>
> PLEASE BE CAREFULLL!! DON'T THINK THANK BECAUSE YOU HEV DONE SOMETHING BEFOR
E
> THAT NOTHING WILL HAPPEN!!! Theat is what happened to me. All I had to do wa
s
> untie a guy wire. I almost died!
>
> My wife is KB0PWD. I am KG0WX. We have both had such a bad nightmare this
> last week with this that we are both gouing to seel al of our radiuos and ge
t
> out of communications completrly. Please be carefiull....
>
> To hell with this hobby - it's not worth a LIFE.
>
>                         Ken bessler KG0WX, GTO268, "metro"
>                         Erica Besler KB0PWD, GTO269, "teaser"
  Sorry to hear of your accident,but you cant realistically blame it
directly on Amateur Radio!What safety precautions did you take?What kind
of shoes were you wearing?(could blame them!)
  You ever have an automobile accident?Where were you going when it
happened.Grocery store?Did you quit eating as a result?Going to the
clothing store?Quit wearing clothes?
  See how rediculious your statement is?
  If you want to quit Amateur Radio I am sure the hobby can withstand
the loss but dont blame the hobby for your misfortune!!
                              Ko4qC


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:21 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!news1.iamerica.net!iad_ppp0417.iamerica.net!quillian
From: [e-mail] (James M Quillian)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Goodbye.
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 15:51:24 -0500
Organization: iAmerica, Inc.
Lines: 49
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53bo2s$[e-mail]> <01bbb4ae$3f327080$720f2399@peter-s> <53dsd4$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.173.253.170
Keywords: from the lunatic
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B]
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24586 rec.radio.swap:73968 rec.radio.cb:31003

In article <53dsd4$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Tony White
) writes:
>Path: news1.iamerica.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintl
ink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newshost.cyberramp.net!usene
t
>From: [e-mail] (Tony White)
>Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.ra
dio.cb
>Subject: Re: Goodbye.
>Date: 8 Oct 1996 15:36:04 GMT
>Organization: Digitrix Microsystems
>Lines: 25
>Message-ID: <53dsd4$[e-mail]>
>References: <[e-mail]> <53bo2s$[e-mail]> <01bbb4ae
$3f327080$720f2399@peter-s>
>Reply-To: [e-mail]
>NNTP-Posting-Host: dal-tsa1-p1-60.cyberramp.net
>X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.7
>Xref: news1.iamerica.net rec.radio.amateur:46 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:23451
 rec.radio.swap:71754 rec.radio.cb:30233


>>> Point: It wasn't the hobby, it was the fall. Sorry, it sounds like a real
>>> disaster. But you could have been doing something less fun such as
>>painting
>>> the trim on the house. A fall is a fall is a fall. Avoid them.
>>
>>
>>Very true.  A few years ago the next door neighboor of a friend was trying
>>to remove
>>ice dams from the roof of his house, fell, and died.  His wife came out to
>>see why
>>he was taking so long and found him.
>>
>>Know your limits and consider what can happen.

>And _always_ use proper safety equipment when working on a tower, a roof, or
>anything of any height.  I would not dream of working on a tower without a
>safety harness.

>>> To repeat: It wasn't the hobby. It was the fall.  You can blame whatever
>>> you like, but the rest of us may not see it that way.

>And it is another example of people not being willing to accept the
>consequences of their actions, because it is easier to shift the blame than t
o
>shoulder it.


ok kennyboy everybody feels sorry for you
do you feel better knowing you bummed out my day
with your sad story? STAY OFF THE ROOF!.
YOU SOUND LIKE A LIBERAL.

your friend, THE LUNATIC.
(ps if you end up croaking, can i have your stuff?)


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:22 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-3.sprintlink.net!interpath!news.interpath.net!news.interpath.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Curt Phillips)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Goodbye.
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 19:16:24 GMT
Organization: Mystic Knights of the Sea
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <53jhl7$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53f5k4$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: cphillips.pdial.interpath.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29797 rec.radio.swap:90778 rec.radio.cb:36307

"William E. Sabin" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Webmaster wrote:> >
>> While I am genuinely sorry (and sad) for your misfortune, we must all
>> remember that nothing in life is certain...you were just as likely to
>> be killed or injured in a car crash, and industrial accident or even
>> taking a shower....I have worked on towers (at 1500 feet) for over 15
>> years...some minor scratches but (so far) nothing serious.  I always

>If you were to fall from one of your 1500 foot towers, wouldn't you
>get discouraged and give up tower climbing, ham radio, etc?

  Not necessarily.  I know a person who fell from a 2000 foot tower, and he
still climbs towers, enjoys being a ham, etc.

  Oh... he didn't fall ALL THE WAY DOWN from 2000... he just fell to the
end of his safety belt... maybe six feet or so.

  The moral of the story?  Get and USE good safety equipment.

=========== Opinions expressed are solely those of the author ==========
Curt Phillips, CEM KD4YU (ex-WB4LHI)  | They that can give up essential
Engineer/Writer/Adventurer/Raconteur  | liberty to obtain a little
Chairman, Tar Heel Scanner/SWL Group  | temporary safety deserve neither
ARRL Life; QCWA; Raleigh ARS; NRA; AEE|liberty nor safety. -Ben Franklin
==== [e-mail] ====== [Copyright 1996 All rights reserved]====



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:23 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.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,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Goodbye.
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 15:31:04 -0700
Organization: none
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53f5k4$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <53jhl7$[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)
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29803 rec.radio.swap:90790 rec.radio.cb:36315

Curt Phillips wrote:
>
> Not necessarily.  I know a person who fell from a 2000 foot tower, and he
> still climbs towers, enjoys being a ham, etc.
>
>   Oh... he didn't fall ALL THE WAY DOWN from 2000... he just fell to the
> end of his safety belt... maybe six feet or so.
>
>   The moral of the story?  Get and USE good safety equipment.
>



That six-footer would do it for *me*, I guarantee you.

Bill W0IYH


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:24 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!miwok!ultra.sonic.net!news
From: [e-mail] (I hate Spam)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Goodbye.
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 02:14:56 GMT
Organization: Disorganized
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53bo2s$[e-mail]> <01bbb4ae$3f327080$720f2399@peter-s> <53dsd4$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp4.zapcom.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/16.299
X-No-Archive: yes
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29806 rec.radio.swap:90795 rec.radio.cb:36320

[e-mail] (James M Quillian) wrote:

>ok kennyboy everybody feels sorry for you
>do you feel better knowing you bummed out my day
>with your sad story? STAY OFF THE ROOF!.
>YOU SOUND LIKE A LIBERAL.


At least he is not sounding like a "conservative".  He did not try to
con us out of our money by saying we should be personally responsible
for his error.

-

Notice: Unsolicited commercial email is subject to archival fee of $20 US
per message--mailing denotes acceptance of these terms.

I'd rather be right, than Politically Correct - Old.Salt


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:25 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.walltech.com!news.his.com!node2.frontiernet.net!news.frontiernet.net!mulveyr
From: [e-mail] (Rich & Katy Mulvey)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Goodbye.
Date: 11 Oct 1996 11:36:25 GMT
Organization: Mulvey Home Node
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53bo2s$[e-mail]> <01bbb4ae$3f327080$720f2399@peter-s> <53dsd4$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr0-33.dial.roc.frontiernet.net
X-Newsreader: slrn (0.8.8.4 (BETA) UNIX)
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29823 rec.radio.swap:90833 rec.radio.cb:36339

On Fri, 11 Oct 1996 02:14:56 GMT, I hate Spam <[e-mail]> wrote:
>[e-mail] (James M Quillian) wrote:
>
>>ok kennyboy everybody feels sorry for you
>>do you feel better knowing you bummed out my day
>>with your sad story? STAY OFF THE ROOF!.
>>YOU SOUND LIKE A LIBERAL.
>
>
>At least he is not sounding like a "conservative".  He did not try to
>con us out of our money by saying we should be personally responsible
>for his error.
>


   Ahem - the conservative philosophy dicates that people take
personal responsibility for their actions.  The Liberal philosophy is the
one that claims that society as a whole is responsible for assuming
the burden of caring for the welfare of individuals.

- Rich



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:26 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.erols.net!EU.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.icanect.net!Icanect
From: [e-mail] (Paul)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Goodbye.
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 96 05:39:24 GMT
Organization: Internet Communications of America, Inc.
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <53fdjv$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.142.163.45
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:116281 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29830 rec.radio.swap:90841 rec.radio.cb:36343

In article <[e-mail]>,
   Dan K Nelson <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Ken Bessler wrote:
>> >
>> > (please excuse anty spelling mistakes due to h9gh dosages
if pain killers ad
>> > severe visdion pr4oblems)
>> >
>> > I have4 had several hobnbies im my 32 years and one of
them was Amateur
>> > radio. On monhdaY September 30th, I was critically
injured when falling some
>> > 1-1/2 stories while trying to adjust the guy line on my
Cushcrafh HF
>> > verticall. I just got out of the hospitall today. I have
to go back in opn
>> > monday to get my face ro constructed. I have lost the use
of my lweft eye
>> > because I managed to land head first on a cinder block.
The damage was quite
>> > bad, including some peralisis <sp> of the left side of my
bnody. My nose id
>> > GONE. My kids (4) are scared of me now! is this hobby
worth it? no.
>> >
>> > To hell with this hobby - it's not worth a LIFE.
>> >
>> >                         Ken bessler KG0WX, GTO268,
"metro"
>> >                         Erica Besler KB0PWD, GTO269,
"teaser"
>
>Whatever happened to that novel idea of Personal
Responsibility? Although I am truly
>sorry for your misfortune, I have found that in my life, I
have always been either
>directly or indirectly responsible for each of my
"accidents"... Every person plots
>his/her own course in life...
>
>Should we ban cars because of drunks? How about matches
because of fires, or pools
>because of drownings? I think not.
>
><<< DAN >>>

Thank you Dan, I could not have said it better. Again, I am
truly sorry for the pain and suffering of this individual. I
hope this individual makes a speedy recovery and reconsiders
the decision to leave the art of Ham Radio, it is the best
hobby I have ever had!

Paul Freidberg, R.N.
KF4LNN


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:27 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!uwm.edu!homer.alpha.net!usenet
From: Gary Klechowitz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Goodbye.
Date: 11 Oct 1996 16:08:33 GMT
Organization: Alpha.net -- Milwaukee, WI
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <53lre2$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: host35.alliedcg.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29836 rec.radio.swap:90853 rec.radio.cb:36347

Life in general has its risks because we are mortal. Some recreation/hobbies h
ave
more risks than others. There certainly is more risk in persuing sky diving th
an
there is in collecting stamps.

I used to climb roofs and take some risks years back when I was first involved
 in
ham radio. Today if I get re-involved in ham radio (I am considering that) I w
ill
probably opt to take less risks or put up antennas that do not involve so much
 risk.

Your accident is very unfortunate but is not the fault of the hobby in general
.
Years back I have known many OMs that put antennas on high roofs and towers an
d
lived to tell about it. I have also heard of persons installing TV antennas th
at
have either been electrocuted or fallen off the roof as you did so is watching
 TV
worth the risk? Your love for the hobby is put to the test. Maybe it wasnt wor
th the
risk to you.

Gary K.



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:30 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.ksu.ksu.edu!mccall.com!news.flinthills.com!news.mid.net!wormer.fn.net![e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Goodbye.
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: Ken Bessler <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 09:13:34 -0500
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
 <[e-mail]>
Organization: Design Services Company
NNTP-Posting-Host: fsa97.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: Scott Rosenfeld NF3I <[e-mail]>
Lines: 36
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29841 rec.radio.swap:90875 rec.radio.cb:36349

Scott Rosenfeld NF3I wrote:
>
> One guy in particular, the one you quoted, is a particularly large
> asshole.  99.9% of us do wish you the absolute best and welcome you
> whenever if you feel like coming back...
>
> 73 for a while
> --
> * Scott Rosenfeld NF3I

Well Scott, Thanks for the best wishes. I have to disagree with your numbers,
though:

40% are telling me not to blame amatuer radio unless I blame driving,
walking, breathing, etc. FACT: Amateur radio is a hobby, NOT a mandatory
activity. I didn't have to be playing with my radios. If I was involved in
a civil emergency and this happened while trying to restore critical
communications, that would have been different.

20% are calling me a "loser", "whiner" etc.

20% think I am faking it (I had my dad take pictures and I have hospital
records, Lortab perscriptions, etc.).

10% are telling me to shut the f#$k up.

10% seem genually <sp> concerned.

The fall really made me feel stupid for risking my life for something so
trivial but the responses I have gotten to my original posting (which was
designed as a wake up call for my fellow hams and CB'ers to "be carefull")
have really pushed me farther away from communications as a hobby.

Right now I am really disgusted with amateur radio altogether....

                                Ken Bessler


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:31 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!night.primate.wisc.edu!nntp.msstate.edu!news.memphis.edu!eta.stim.tec.tn.us!ceddlemon
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Goodbye.
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Date: 10 Oct 96 23:56:10 CST
Organization: The University of Memphis
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53f47b$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eta.stim.tec.tn.us
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29854 rec.radio.swap:90892 rec.radio.cb:36358

In article <53f47b$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dick Merryma
n) writes:
> Ken Bessler ([e-mail]) wrote:

deletions

> : Moral of the story:
> :
> : PLEASE BE CAREFULLL!! DON'T THINK THANK BECAUSE YOU HEV DONE SOMETHING BEF
ORE
> : THAT NOTHING WILL HAPPEN!!! Theat is what happened to me. All I had to do
was
> : untie a guy wire. I almost died!

deletions

... this was not quoted from the original post ... sorry if I screwed it up.

But, a local ham died from a fall off his crank-up tower.  The tower was in
the down position but that was still 30' up to the antenna.

His safety harness broke while he was adjusting his SWR down to work in a
portion of a band where his son had privledges.  He hit the corner of his
truck.  The fall left him with a broken back and a concussion.

Phil, WA4IPV, lived for about a month after the accident and died while in
the hospital.  So I don't know anything about the earlier posting but this
one just happen this past Spring.

I'm sure there are many other cases but when they come this close to home
you listen up!  You can't be too careful.

73,

Charles    W4BIV



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:32 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!fc.hp.com!ron
From: [e-mail] (Ron Miller)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Goodbye.
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Date: 10 Oct 1996 17:09:25 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Fort Collins Site
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <53jak5$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.fc.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2.10]
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29855 rec.radio.swap:90897 rec.radio.cb:36360

Ken Bessler ([e-mail]) wrote:

: 40% are telling me not to blame amatuer radio unless I blame driving,
: walking, breathing, etc. FACT: Amateur radio is a hobby, NOT a mandatory

It's a matter of degree. I don't have to clean the gutters on the roof
of my house, but I do. I might fall off the ladder doing that too.
Is that worth a life?

I've never thought of ham radio as risking
my life. I have carefully thought about certains tasks that I might
undertake as potentially life threatening (like tinkering with
the high-voltage on a tube amp, or climbing a tree to hang an antenna.)

: The fall really made me feel stupid for risking my life for something so
: trivial but the responses I have gotten to my original posting (which was
: designed as a wake up call for my fellow hams and CB'ers to "be carefull")
: have really pushed me farther away from communications as a hobby.

The 'be careful' warning is a valuable service to the rest of us.

It's just that some of us think that you're not quite warning us about
the correct thing. If you go find some Novice classes and try to talk them
out of radio as a hobby, then you'd be behaving destructively.

: Right now I am really disgusted with amateur radio altogether....

A friend of mine is in a wheelchair. His brother put a .22 slug in
his spine when he was 14. It happened while they were cleaning their
guns after a day at the shooting range.

He is still a  recreational target shooter. He knows who and what to
blame for his paralysis.

I hope you find similar clarity in time.

Ron Miller
NW0U


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:33 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.asu.edu!usenet
From: "Patrick D. Lukens" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Goodbye.
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 10:25:01 -0700
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
         <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.219.120.141
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; I)
CC: [e-mail]
Xref: news2.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29856 rec.radio.swap:90907 rec.radio.cb:36361

Ken Bessler wrote:
> 10% seem genually <sp> concerned.

I believe that there are a large number of us who have remained silent
who fall into this category.  Unfortunately, there are a large number of
people who become jerks when they can hide behind their computers, and a
large number of people who believed your original post to be a troll, and
decided to respond in a stupid manner (rather than leaving it alone, as
they should have).  I was particularly bothered by those who said
something like:

"Sorry to hear that.  Now, what are you selling?"

Anyway, Ken, take care of yourself.  There are people out there in the
world who aren't assholes.  However, I have come to the conclusion that
in most cases, you're better off getting to know people off the net.
Most people are much more apt to be civil when you are looking them in
the eye.

--
--Patrick

---------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Patrick D. Lukens
    Ph.D. Candidate, History     |  Format Advisor, Graduate College
 Modern Mexico, Public History   |      Arizona State University
     Modern Latin America        |      Tempe, Arizona 85287-1003
   Daddy to Victoria, Age 5      |           [phone]
     [e-mail]       |      [e-mail]
                http://www.public.asu.edu/~plukens
---------------------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:34 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!netaxs.com!news.pond.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!jsbach.n2.net!news
From: [e-mail] (John Read)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: GPS Mobile Antenna?
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 15:52:08 GMT
Organization: N2 Networking
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <53b91g$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp174.n2.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

I have a GPS and it's been great as I do a lot of driving.  It works
pretty well with the unit's antenna sitting up on the dash but I was
wondering if anyone knows how to make a mobile antenna for the GPS
frequencies out of maybe a  cell phone antenna or something.  Thanks
for your help.

John KK6OQ
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:34 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!ix.netcom.com!news
From: KD1YV <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Helical wound antenna
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 23:29:53 -0300
Organization: Hamily !
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <52g4o2$[e-mail]> <52s3ut$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dby-ct2-20.ix.netcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun Oct 06 10:33:17 PM CDT 1996
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win16; I)

Richard Dunmyer wrote:
>
> [e-mail] (Atsushi Otsuka) wrote:
>
> >I have seen a couple of helical wound antenna projects for HF on the
> >published magazines and handbooks. They usually provide information

{snip}

Just as a side issue, perhaps interesting, perhaps not ...

One of the antenna vendors at the Boxboro hamfest this weekend had, on display
, a
"40 meter rubber duck."  It was about the size and shape of an inverted 2 lite
r
soda-pop bottle.  I asked him if it worked, and he claimed that it did :-)

--
73 de Jim, KD1YV


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:36 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.mindspring.com!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!news.structured.net!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx02-09
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Helical wound antenna
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 96 08:02:37 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <53adct$[e-mail]>
References: <52g4o2$[e-mail]> <52s3ut$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx02-09.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <[e-mail]>,
   KD1YV <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Richard Dunmyer wrote:
>>
>> [e-mail] (Atsushi Otsuka) wrote:
>>
>> >I have seen a couple of helical wound antenna projects for HF on the
>> >published magazines and handbooks. They usually provide information
>
>{snip}
>
>Just as a side issue, perhaps interesting, perhaps not ...
>
>One of the antenna vendors at the Boxboro hamfest this weekend had, on
display, a
>"40 meter rubber duck."  It was about the size and shape of an inverted 2
liter
>soda-pop bottle.  I asked him if it worked, and he claimed that it did :-)

Of course it does. "Worked" isn't a quantitative measure and can mean
anything the vendor would like it to. It'll radiate, sure. Its field
strength will be _many_ dB below a dipole, also sure. If you run a T
connector to your dummy load and attach a wire about the same length as the
40 meter "rubber ducky", it'll radiate just about the same as the "rubber
ducky" and will provide about as good an impedance match. On this I'll be
willing to bet real money.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:37 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.enteract.com!news
From: Paul Moller <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Helical wound antenna
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 15:56:28 -0500
Organization: EnterAct L.L.C. Turbo-Elite News Server
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <52g4o2$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: able-5.d.enteract.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

> (3) Why do you need to wind the element? What is the advantage of
>     winding the element?
>
> Thanks,
>

There is only one real advantage to winding the element. That is of
physical length. As other people have stated, there are many cons to a
helical, but the major pro is short length. Consider a 1//4 wave
vertical on 80m for the car. I suspect it has been done before, but a
full size monopole would be difficult to  construct and keep on the car
a 65mph.

WD9ABE


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:38 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.amaranth.com!usenet
From: Gene <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Help w/ vertical radials
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 06:13:45 -0500
Organization: Rocking Chair University
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.96.254.27
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Mike:

If you have access to old issues of QST there is an interesting article
in the December 1976 QST (pg 13f) dealing with the use of multiple
length radials.  Table lists extensive data on use of 16, 24, 36, 60,
90, and 120 radials.  The author is K4ERO/HC1 who was at the time of his
article associated with HCJB, The Voice of the Andes.  I tried his
system a number of years ago and had success.  73,  Gene KB4JI


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:39 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!news2.interlog.com!rose.com!news
From: [e-mail] (T. Mooney)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: HELP WITH CB RADIO INTERFERANCE. (SP)
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 04:41:22 GMT
Organization: Rose Media Incorporated, Canada
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <53kimj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: s017.rose.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

any one know how I can get rid of cb cross channeling? When I transmit
it cross' with the phone lines.. I have a realistic cb.. (which is
probably not important) and also a 5 foot RAMI fiberglass whip antenna
on a 10 foot pole in the ground in the back yard. Will raising the
antenna higher help? what if I put it on the roof? what about
attaching it to the chimney? Please help me out!



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:39 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.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] (GKittoman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: HELP!  Need advise and suggestions on HF Vertical
Date: 9 Oct 1996 12:10:36 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 9
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <53gips$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (GKittoman)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I am looking to put up a verticle (not a dipole) antenna like the
Cushcraft R7000 or a Butternut, or maybe even a GAP.  I know you're out
there, but would you please take a minute to send me some feedback on any
of these antennas that you have had EXPERIENCE with?  I would greatly
appreciate your help. Any info on noise, tuning and set-up would be
especially helpful.  Also, if you have one of these for sale, let me know.

Glen Kitto
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:42 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news-m01.ny.us.ibm.net!news-s01.ca.us.ibm.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HELP!  Need advise and suggestions on HF Vertical
Date: 10 Oct 1996 14:43:55 GMT
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <53j23b$[e-mail]>
References: <53gips$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip129-37-242-107.ca.us.ibm.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <53gips$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (GKittoman) writes:
>I am looking to put up a verticle (not a dipole) antenna like the
>Cushcraft R7000 or a Butternut, or maybe even a GAP.  I know you're out
>there, but would you please take a minute to send me some feedback on any
>of these antennas that you have had EXPERIENCE with?  I would greatly
>appreciate your help. Any info on noise, tuning and set-up would be
>especially helpful.  Also, if you have one of these for sale, let me know.
>
>Glen Kitto
>[e-mail]

I used the Cushcraft R-5 for years with great results.  It is a great antenna,
gets out good, and gives you exactly the SWR curves advertised by the mfr.
I found that I did not have to fiddle with the lengths; I put it up once and n
ever
had to take it down.

Many friends of mine found that the R-7 blew traps a LOT anytime they used
over about 100 watts of power.  This is apparently a design flaw in the R-7,
and may be why Cushcraft came out with the R-7000.

The R-7000 is fairly new, so you won't find a LOT of people using them yet.
But I suspect it is essentially a re-engineered R-7, aimed at correcting the
blown trap problem.

Good luck!

Roger J. Buffington
W6VZV
[e-mail]

USC Law School, Class of '97

--------------------------------------------------
"I want to die peacefully, in my sleep, like my Grandfather."
"Not screaming, and in terror, like his passengers."
--------------------------------------------------



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:44 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!nntp.earthlink.net!usenet
From: Ed Lawrence <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: HF Mobile antennas- real world.
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 09:37:24 +0000
Organization: Earthlink Network, Inc.
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cust64.max3.seattle.wa.ms.uu.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; U)

John Mc`Pherson Anderson wrote:
>
> Hi there all Radio Hams World Wide. I am interested in maybe trying out
> operating HF mobile and i see there are quite a few different manufacturers
of
> antennas about and i want an honest opinion of whose is the best. The bands
> which interest me the most for mobile operations are 80 metres and 20 metres
> but if a good multiband HF whip is available that may be of interest.
> 73 de John MI0AAZ in Coleraine (QRA IO65QD).Hello John.
        I have run mobile several times over the last 32 years, and will
offer an opinion, for whatever it is worth.  Antennas don't care who
makes them, they just work from physical principles.  Naturally, how an
antenns is constructed mechenically affects reliability, but that is a
side issue.
        In the real world, you only have a few issues to confront.
First, ANY loading coil reduces the efficiency of a HF antenna.  Since
you cannot run a 1/4 wavelength on 80, you will still need one.
Therefore, choose a large coil, with large wire.  The issue here is
"skin effect", so it is the surface area of the wire that is important.
On 20 meters, you might be able to get away with a quarter wave antenna.
But I think that tree strike problem would be severe!  So you will still
need a loading coil.  A cap hat also works well to reduce either the
total length, or the amount of coil.
        The choice of base or center loading is up to you.  I don't
think there is a clear answer IN THE REAL WORLD on this point.  Theory
gives an edge to the center load, but I wish to point out that a center
load requires a larger inductor, which will have more loss and also a
narrower bandwidth for a given SWR.  Take your choice.
        As to mobile trap verticals.  Those small traps are LOSSY!
Make a test.  Using a 100 watt CW input, key down for 60 seconds.
Un-key, and grab the trap. Hot, ain't it?  That heat comes from the
losses in the trap, and is not radiated!  How can you spot this in the
spec sheet?  Look for the word "broadband traps"  That means lossy.
Some spec sheets show you nice SWR/freq. curves.  You want the one that
has the narrowest bandwidth, not the widest!
        OK, what have I used in the past?
1. Webester Bandspanner- Last I knew, no longer in production.  Use with
a matchbox.  Good antenna.  Bandchanging at night is a problem.
2. Presently- Screwdriver.  The best antenna I have used yet!  Larger
diameter coil, tunable while mobile, no need to stop.  I hate ferrites
in power RF applications, as I have been disapointed in the past.  Again
I use a matchbox.
3. A Outbacker Perth Plus.  I did not use a matchbox with this one, as
my test on my own car had indicated that it would not be required.
However, on the rental car I used, it was needed, and not available!
the Perth Plus is probably a good antenna for some applications, such as
the vacation trip with a rental car, but it will still suffer from the
ills of such a short antenna.  Use a matchbox!

OK, I thing that about does it.  Of them all, I llike the screwdriver
best.   Good Luck!   WA5SWD.


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:45 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newspump.sol.net!news.mindspring.com!uunet!in3.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: HF mobile antennas. What performs best ?
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 19:11:12 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup110-3-12.swipnet.se
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
NNTP-Posting-User: ca371ac9c2b9db57d345c213928e7f29
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b6Gold (Win16; I)
To: John Mc`Pherson Anderson <[e-mail]>

John Mc`Pherson Anderson wrote:
>
> Hi there all Radio Hams World Wide. I am interested in maybe trying out
> operating HF mobile and i see there are quite a few different manufacturers
of
> antennas about and i want an honest opinion of whose is the best. The bands
> which interest me the most for mobile operations are 80 metres and 20 metres
> but if a good multiband HF whip is available that may be of interest.
> 73 de John MI0AAZ in Coleraine (QRA IO65QD).

Anything would bee OK, I use the HUSTLER antenna and it┤s OK

M   /    SM0BKZ


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:46 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!cs.utexas.edu!wotan.compaq.com!twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com!news
From: Monty Wilson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: HF mobile antennas. What performs best ?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (System Administrator)
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: very little
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 14:36:02 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: monty.pc.hou.compaq.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 15

[e-mail] (John Mc`Pherson Anderson) wrote:
>Hi there all Radio Hams World Wide. I am interested in maybe trying out
>operating HF mobile...

I've gotten many compliments on my Bug Catcher.  If you ever attend a
large hamfest, stop by the bug catcher dealer and explain your preferred
bands.  He can put together a system for you which will be optimal for
your favorite bands, and perform as well as possible on others.

One thing though: bug catchers are large.
--
.........Monty.
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:46 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!spool.mu.edu!munnari.OZ.AU!news.mel.connect.com.au!news.melbpc.org.au!news
From: [e-mail] (Alan Fowler)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF mobile antennas: silver plated wire?
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 04:12:50 GMT
Organization: Melbourne PC User Group Inc, Australia
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <53khi3$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wallaby9.melbpc.org.au
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (David Feldman) wrote:

>Would silver plated wire, when used to wind resonators, improve efficiency
>and/or power handling capacity of a coil loaded HF mobile antenna?

>73 Dave WB0GAZ [e-mail]

        Silver plating usually increases the r.f. resistance of a conductor,
unless the wire has been plated from an extremely pure bath containing
no additives.  So far, I haven't found anyone still using this
process.

        Silver plating baths used in the last 30 years or so contain
"brightners" which co-deposit with the silver to give a smooth, bright
finish.  Unfortunately, these finishes have much higher resistance
than pure copper.

        The best result is obtained from electrical grade wire or tubing with
the thinnest posible covering layer of a low-loss dielectric.

        You should also look at the antenna itself.  Do NOT use one that has
been chrome plated.  Underneath the chrome there is usually a layer of
nickel, and this is one of the lossiest materials you can use.  You
will usually do far better to use a stainless steel whip.

                regards,  Alan.




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:47 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.structured.net!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx02-34
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF mobile antennas: silver plated wire?
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 96 11:12:17 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <53ilki$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53goo0$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx02-34.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (David Feldman) wrote:
>In article <53goo0$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jim B. Wilson)
writes:
>>David Feldman ([e-mail]) wrote:
>>: Would silver plated wire, when used to wind resonators, improve
efficiency
>>: and/or power handling capacity of a coil loaded HF mobile antenna?

 . .

>Seriously (sort of) it seems that resonators get hot during transmit
>(to varying degrees depending on power, band, resonator type, etc.),
>and what I'm trying to figure out is to what extent this heat is a
>culprit in loss (relative to an unloaded antenna) and if the heat could
>be reduced by improved conductivity in the coil (at the expense of Q and
>bandwidth).
>
>73 Dave WB0GAZ [e-mail]

The coil is a major source of loss, although as Tom W8JI has pointed out,
the ground loss might exceed it in some cases. Yes, the loss (heat) could
be reduced if you could increase the conductivity in the coil. But, silver
plating won't do it. Silver is only marginally more conductive than copper.
You can decrease the loss by physically making the coil so that its loss is
minimized (Q is greatest). This is done by choice of wire size and
spacing, and coil length and diameter. I'll let Tom tell you how; he's got
the most experience with this.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:48 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!news2.EUnet.fr!news.guetali.fr!usenet
From: "Charles Hoareau" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: hf5b buterfly
Date: 6 Oct 1996 14:56:49 GMT
Organization: Win95
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <01bbb375$9a86ed60$1f2e6ac1@d68hc>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp11.guetali.fr
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

i hope to get some informations about this antenna or to receive a cear
notice
thanks for this
email : [e-mail]
73 from d68hc
charles


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:49 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.uoregon.edu!news.u.washington.edu!news.alt.net!news1.alt.net!news.aa.net!ratty.wolfe.net!usenet
From: Ramon Gandia <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: hf5b buterfly
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 22:03:00 -0800
Organization: Anvil Technology
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb375$9a86ed60$1f2e6ac1@d68hc>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: nome-ts1-p01.nome.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Charles Hoareau wrote:
>
> i hope to get some informations about this antenna or to receive a cear
> notice
> thanks for this
> email : [e-mail]
> 73 from d68hc
> charles

There was an article about the HF5B butternut beam some years ago
in CQ or QST.  You could search for it in the library.  Maybe 10
years ago....

The gist of it was that the beam is extremely difficult to adjust,
and exhibits gain and f/b ratio only on a very narrow frequency
range.  The little elements have a very high Q, and on 20 meters
the bandwidth is like 25 kHz or so...  Outside this bandwidth, the
swr climbs and the gain/fb ratio goes to pot.

Also, the f/b ratio is decent at the right frequency, but the gain
is not so good, like 2 - 3 db or so.

Because of this, I decided not to buy one.  But, it has its time and
place.  All the above is from memory, and I could be wrong on the
exact details, you should look up the article instead.

Ramon, AL7X   [ To foil SpamBots, my address is not machine readable
Nome, Alaska  [ Please e-mail replies to:   rfg.at.nome.dot.net


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:50 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!psgrain!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How would I solve this?
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 96 07:07:38 GMT
Organization: Not Enough
Lines: 43
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <53cuo4$[e-mail]>
References: <539uv6$[e-mail]> <53b5h7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:

>In almost every case, you would want to use a 1:1 choke type
>balun. The reason is a choke balun is much less affected by
>the differential mode impedances.  Only the common mode
>impedance and voltage affects the choke balun, and in the
>worse case conditions the result is usually a lack of proper
>balancing rather than actual power loss.

The key word in the above paragraph is "usually".  System loss
will vary as a function of numerous factors, including the
interwinding capacitance of the balun.  At high load impedances,
this capacitance may provide a significant current path across
the parallel conductors of the line.

>Baluns are not as lossy as often thought, and can operate
>efficiently over a very wide range of impedances. I tested a 4:1
>voltage balun in a the smallest, cheapest MFJ tuner, and the balun
>losses were MUCH less than the tuning circuit losses with load
>impedances from a few ohms to a thousand ohms.

Was this a ferrite core balun?  Was the load reactive, and if
so, how did you measure the power being delivered?  Did you keep
records of the loss in the balun?  As a matter of curiosity, I'd
be interested to know how it was constructed and what you
measured at various loads.

Incidentally, I want to point out that there's a significant
problem with any claim that a voltage balun can perform well over
a wide range of impedances.  If the XL of the balun's winding is,
say, 200-500 ohms, it can't possibly operate as intended when the
load is 1000-2000 ohms.  The winding represents a near-short under
these conditions.

>If you use less power, you can use a much smaller balun.

The problem here is that the symptoms of inefficiency may be
masked by the power level involved.  Best bet is to use a balun
where its intended, and to find another, more reliable means to
drive this antenna.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:52 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How would I solve this?
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 10:59:27 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <539uv6$[e-mail]> <53b5h7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cjbriggs-mobl.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:
> The balun is a six inch tall
> stack of 2 inch diameter 43 mix ferrite torroids with five turns...

Hi Tom, quoting from the Amidon brochure, "... the 43 material is
best for everything above 30MHz. However, it is still very effective
across the entire amateur band but not quite as good as the 77 material."

I have a hard time understanding which ferrite to use. Is there any
reason you chose #43 over #77 for HF? Would one turn on 30 inches
do the same thing as 5 turns on 6 inches?

thanks and 73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:53 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-9.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How would I solve this?
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 09:06:05 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53fjqb$[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 a "near short" is only lossy if the Q of the balun is low. If I placed
> a low loss 200 ohms inductor across a 1000 ohm load near the tuner, the
> increase in system loss would be very low.

Hi Tom, I'm having trouble understanding the consequences if the balun
inductance is too low. "Too low" implies a malfunction. What actually
happens between the tuner input and the balun output if the balun
inductance is much too low? Common mode currents? Losses in the tuner?

thanks and 73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:54 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!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: How would I solve this?
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 96 01:35:16 GMT
Organization: Not Enough
Lines: 21
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <53k8df$[e-mail]>
References: <53epjq$[e-mail]> <53i95k$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

        [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
     >[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

Hi Tom,

>>In any event, I think its safe to say that a balun attached
>>directly to a non-resonant antenna is highly unlikely to result
>>in an efficient system.

>I take it you disagree with Lewallen and Frank Witt's articles then?

Please quote the statements or paragraphs you're referring to.

>I wonder why I can't measure that great loss here, and why it can't
>be show to exist for a choke balun under virtually any load?

Which type of choke balun, and what was the method you used
to measure the power being delivered to the (reactive) load?

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:55 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.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: How would I solve this?
Date: 10 Oct 1996 03:38:28 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 25
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <53i95k$[e-mail]>
References: <53epjq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <53epjq$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>
>You're not the only person who's reported an experience like that.
>If I remember correctly, you were monitoring the temperature of
>the toroid with a probe, so we know whatever power was being lost,
>wasn't dissipated in the core.  Maybe it was the change in
>radiation pattern that improved your signal, or maybe the balun
>was causing losses to increase elsewhere in the system.  In any
>event, I think its safe to say that a balun attached directly to
>a non-resonant antenna is highly unlikely to result in an
>efficient system.
>
>73,
>Jack  WB3U

Jack,

I take it you disagree with Lewallen and Frank Witt's articles then?

I wonder why I can't measure that great loss here, and why it can't be
show to exist for a choke balun under virtually any load?

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:55 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news-stock.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-hk.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!newsgate.cuhk.edu.hk!news.uoregon.edu!news.u.washington.edu!news.alt.net!newspost1.alt.net!usenet
From: "Peter Gottlieb" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How would I solve this?
Date: 11 Oct 1996 02:19:15 GMT
Organization: Altopia Corp. - Affordable Usenet Access - http://www.alt.net
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <01bbb71a$b5599400$02102399@peter-s>
References: <[e-mail]> <53fgvb$[e-mail]> <53hqph$[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

>
> This is absolutely true, and the ease with which these
> devices can be overheated is the reason some suppliers
> recommend teflon coax for this use.

I guess that means one should not pot the thingy...   ;)




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:56 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.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] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How would I solve this?
Date: 11 Oct 1996 10:49:14 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 49
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <53lmpb$[e-mail]>
References: <53hqph$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Jack,
In article <53hqph$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>>On real high power, or very high common mode impedances, I use
>>an air core balun. It is the most cost effective and efficienct
>>design.
>
>Tom, I'm confused by this statement.  In your other post, you
>said you were using "a six inch tall stack of 2 inch diameter
>43 mix ferrite torroids . . ." with 1500 watts.  This was in
>response to someone who was planning to use a balun to feed a
>dipole in a non-resonant, multiband application.  Doesn't that
>person's application (and yours) contradict the statement above?

No, because I should have been clearer. 1500 watts is not "real high
power". By real high power, I meant several kilowatts up.  The actual
problem boils down to voltage across the choke balun, one tough case was
isolating the feedline of a cable leaving the bottom end of a ground
independent vertical. With a few thousand ohms of impedance at the end, it
would have required hundreds of beads to isolate the line without
excessive heating in the beads. An air core choke was much more effective
because the impedance and Q were both higher.

>>I've yet to see any choke balun have a large percentage of
>>power loss, even though 10% power loss at 1500 watts would be
>>fatal to the small bead baluns using a string of 1/2 inch beads
>>a foot long.
>
This is absolutely true, and the ease with which these
>devices can be overheated is the reason some suppliers
>recommend teflon coax for this use.  Nevertheless, placing a
>string of beads over the end of the line produces distinctly
>different results than other types of baluns when things go
>awry.  It should be remembered that this type of device does
>not place windings (shunt reactance) across the feedline.

It sure does. Just as much as a twisted pair does, or more. Typical
coaxial line is in the high 20 pF per foot range, while parallel wires can
get down to a few pF per foot.

In any event, the capacitance is not a problem at all unless the
dielectric is very lossy. A pure capaciatnce or inductance shunting the
line does NOT cause loss. It is a reactance, NOT a power dissipating
resistance. The loss would be no higher than using the same length of line
as a transmission line. Even with a 100:1 SWR, the loss in a few feet of
all but the poorest line is pretty low from the capacitance.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:57 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.zoomnet.net!newsfeed.one.net!news.accessus.net!news.uoregon.edu!hunter.premier.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!btnet!zetnet.co.uk!btnet-feed1!news.compulink.co.uk!cix.compulink.co.uk!usenet
From: [e-mail] ("Stephen Walters")
Subject: Re: Icom IC-Delta 1A
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Compulink Information eXchange
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 15:48:42 GMT
X-News-Software: Ameol32
Lines: 4

there is no way no control this radio from a pc, or anything else.

Steve / G7VFY
Icom Delta 1e.


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:58 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!metro.atlanta.com!cpk-news-feed3.bbnplanet.com!news.mountain.net!usenet
From: ken coleman <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: INFO : 2meter antenna DX
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 1996 07:12:24 -0400
Organization: MountainNet, Inc. Morgantown WV 800.444.1458
Lines: 20
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)

Susan Driggers wrote:
>
> I am looking for info on building a 2 meter antenna that would allow me
> to use a Radio Shack (no jokes plese) handheld 5w transceiver to contact
> anything .. :> Thanks.

Susan, your 2M Radio Shack Handheld Transceiver (HT) is highly respected
for its purpose.  It is undoubtedly an HTX 202, FM transceiver which
will work very well for short range conversations and for accessing
repeaters, which will extend your range (but not a whole lot--maybe up
to 50 miles).  As for antennas, you can buy them or build them.  For
building, there are suggestions in a book available at Radio Shack
called "Now You're Talking", or you can get a list of publications
(including an "Antenna Handbook") from the American Radio Relay League,
225 Main St., Newington, CT 06111-1494.  Also, you will benefit greatly
from finding some hams in your area who will be happy to answer the many
questions we all have.  You might start looking for both Hams and books
at a local electronic supply store.
73 Ken



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:48:59 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!enews.sgi.com!news.sgi.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!nntp.earthlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-ana-24.sprintlink.net!ratty.wolfe.net!usenet
From: Ramon Gandia <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Kurt's rectangle
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 1996 22:35:11 -0800
Organization: Anvil Technology
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <52kqd3$[e-mail]> <52o49b$[e-mail]> <530cfe$[e-mail]> <530qe4$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: nome-ts1-p03.nome.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
To: Roy Lewallen <[e-mail]>

Hi Roy.

I too read the Kurt Rectangle article.  Looked extremely interesting.
Has this rectangle been modeled to see how it work on half its
design frequency, or any of the harmonics?  Might work as a multiband
antenna.

My other thought was to put outriggers on my tower, and make up two
rectangles, at right angles to each other.  That way I should be able
to cover in all directions by only switching feedlines.  But it would
be very awkward if the rectangle absolutely operated on one band only.

Note my e-mail address is not machine readable to foil the SpamBots.
You will have to address it by hand translating:  rfg.at.nome.dot.net

73, Ramon, AL7X, Nome, Alaska


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:00 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-stkh.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!nntp-oslo.UNINETT.no!nntp-trd.UNINETT.no!nntp.uio.no!news.nacamar.de!uunet!in1.uu.net!delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Kurt's rectangle
Date: Sun, 6 Oct 96 12:43:05 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <52kqd3$[e-mail]> <52o49b$[e-mail]> <530cfe$[e-mail]> <530qe4$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1b.delphi.com
X-To: Ramon Gandia <[e-mail]>

Ramon Gandia <[e-mail]> writes:

>I too read the Kurt Rectangle article.  Looked extremely interesting.
>Has this rectangle been modeled to see how it work on half its
>design frequency, or any of the harmonics?  Might work as a multiband
>antenna.

Hi Ramon, if one breaks the loop at the halfway point, it is
a pretty good almost omni-directional antenna at half the
design frequency. Unfortunately, high angle radiation results
at double the design frequency. I have decided that a delta
loop is superior to the rectangle because it does have decent
performance at double the frequency. If the top of the delta
is horizontal and about 1.5x longer than the sides and it
is fed on one side about 8-10ft down from the top, it has
close to 50ohms feedpoint impedance at resonance. Breaking it
halfway makes it work on half the design frequency and it
has good gain (6dBi) on double the frequency.

So I'm putting up a delta for 40m with a 64ft horizontal run
at 37ft high for use on 80m, 40m, and 20m. A delta should
also have reduced ground losses compared to the rectangle.

73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:01 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!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: Kurt's rectangle
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 12:48:07 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53ejh1$[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)

Gary Coffman wrote:
> Very dry soil, a brick is an extreme example, becomes a very good
> non-dissipative insulator.

Hi Gary, we get 10 inches of rain a year out here in the Aridzone.
Wonder if that makes my radiation patterns more like free space?

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


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:01 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!demos!news1.relcom.ru!EU.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: 11 Oct 1996 00:50:06 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 22
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <53kjlu$[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 Gary, we get 10 inches of rain a year out here in the Aridzone.
>Wonder if that makes my radiation patterns more like free space?
>
>73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)
>
>

Gee, why don't you put two scoops of dirt in a glass of sour milk and make
a cocktail Pecos Pete?

Seriously, look at the conductivity charts for AM BCB stations Cecil. That
dry stuff you live on is lossy as heck, no matter how it cooks in the
electric field microwave.

I'd test it in my oven, but mine has a magnetron and only has magnetic
fields.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:02 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!super.zippo.com!zdc-e!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!feed1.news.erols.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx17-31
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Kurt's rectangle
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 96 17:22:20 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <53lvmb$[e-mail]>
References: <53e4hv$[e-mail]> <53fm6q$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <53htr2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx17-31.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

>   [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:
>
>>What I'm suggesting is that the main source of dissipation in soil
>>is the torquing of the dipolar moment of the water in that soil by
>>the E-field. In my reply to the other Tom I include some experimental
>>results to back that up.

It's quite a leap to conclude from your experiment -- which shows that wet
soil gets hotter than dry soil in a microwave oven -- that "the main source
of dissipation in soil is the torquing of the dipolar moment of the water
in that soil by the E-field". Water changes both the conductivity and
dielectric constant of the soil. Magnetic field-induced eddy currents will
be greater in the more conductive (wet) soil. How is it that your
experiment showed this to not be the case? Or does your oven somehow
produce only an E field with no corresponding H field?

Roy Lewallen, W7EL



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:03 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!news.structured.net!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx02-34
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Kurt's rectangle
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 96 11:29:06 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <53imk3$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53ejh1$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx02-34.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

Gary, you'd better write to the government and tell 'em they better start
over with NEC-4. I modeled a 1 meter diameter horizontal loop on 40 meters.
I think you'll agree that for this small loop the magnetic field
dominates in the near field. In free space its feedpoint impedance was
0.00488 + j189.8 ohms. Placed one meter above "average" ground
(conductivity 5 mS/m, relative permittivity 13), the feedpoint
resistance increased by more than a factor of 10, to 0.0561 ohms. Buried
one meter in the ground, the feedpoint resistance was 54.3 ohms, and buried
10 meters it was 54.5 ohms. NEC-4 lets you choose the conductivity and
permittivity of "free space", so I put it in "free space" and chose
"average" ground constants. The result was a feedpoint resistance of 54.5
ohms.

Now, NEC doesn't ask how much water is in the soil, just the conductivity
and permittivity. Do you suppose there should be a third specification for
wetness, or do you think it's NEC that's all wet? The huge changes in
feedpoint resistance show it sure thinks there's _some_ kind of interaction
going on with the ground.

Hm, if you're right and it's wrong, why don't we all bury our loops?

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:04 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!news.structured.net!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx07-26
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Kurt's rectangle
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 96 00:23:10 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <53mobb$[e-mail]>
References: <53imk3$[e-mail]> <53m74h$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx07-26.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <53m74h$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:

>I don't care what you say about buried loops Roy, lossless magnetic
>radiators work.
>
>I feed my steel well casing with the center conductor of my feedline, and
>ground the inside of it's shield only (zero volts of couse), but not the
>outside, to a small blue swimming pool with pictures of mermaids and
>fishes on the bottom filled with pennies and salt water.
>
>We all know the image antenna is above the well casing, and sticks up 300
>feet in the air. The image antenna radiates and the pool collects the
>displacement currents that spray up out of the well casing.
>
>Geeze, I thought everyone knew about this stuff.

Only us OF's who remember the seminal paper by Larson E. Rapp on the topic
many moons ago.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:05 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.ktb.net!news.electricpages.com!usenet
From: Philip H Fritz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Ladder line feed for UHF
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 10:32:02 -0300
Organization: Avana Communications c/o Innoventures, Inc. (Electric Pages)
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: atl171.avana.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Hi everyone,
I am looking for a better way to feed a Jpole UHF antenna long distances
without using lossy coax. Hardline is out of the price range and regular
9913 is too heavy for where this antenna is going.
What I am looking for is 450 or 300 open line feeds for these VHF/UHF
antennas and how to accomplish this easily.
Anyone out there already doing this?
Thanks
73
Phil
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:06 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!NEWS!not-for-mail
From: "Thomas E. Berry" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Matching a 'T' vertical
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 11:32:44 -0700
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 5

Anyone have an idea on the best way to match a 160 meter vertical with
elevated radials to 80.  I would be feeding the vertical at the high
impedance point on 80.
Thanks
Tom Berry  AA4VV



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:07 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!NEWS!not-for-mail
From: "Thomas E. Berry" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Matching a 'T' vertical
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 1996 16:16:29 -0700
References: <[e-mail]> <53e0s9$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 20

Roy Lewallen wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>,
>    "Thomas E. Berry" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >Anyone have an idea on the best way to match a 160 meter vertical with
> >elevated radials to 80.  I would be feeding the vertical at the high
> >impedance point on 80.
> >Thanks
> >Tom Berry  AA4VV
>
> A good way to match a very high Z is to put a parallel resonant circuit
> across the antenna terminals. Connect the "cold" side of the feedline to
> the radials and tap up on the coil with the "hot" side. Alternately adjust
> the tap position and the resonant circuit capacitor for best match.
>
> Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Thanks Roy, I'll give it a try.

Tom Berry AA4VV



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:08 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.asu.edu!aztec.asu.edu!hamop
From: [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: mismatch between free-space and receiving dipole: seems unimportant
Date: 7 Oct 1996 05:35:33 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <53a4r5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aztec.asu.edu


Jason Williams-Lock wrote:

> But in my case, even though I have a 4:1 impedance mismatch between
> free-space (376.7 ohms) and the receiving dipole (1506 ohms, or there
> abouts), despite this, it seems to have no *noticeable* effect on the
> reception whatsoever ?
>
> Can anyone explain this ? I know mismatches are important (and
> *dangerous*) for transmitters but here we are only dealing with pico-watts
> (pW), the power density (P=E*H) watts per square metre, or P=(E*E)/Zo,
> where Zo is the intrinsic impedance of free-space.

Jason,
        While it is true that the square root of the ratio of the
magnetic and electric fields in Poyntings vector has the dimensions
of an impedance and a value you mention, there is no such problem
as "matching to the impedance of free space".  It certainly bears
no relationship to the feedpoint impedance of any antena.
Charlie, W7XC
--


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:09 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!nntp.snet.net!news.snet.net!usenet
From: tim <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: mobile hf ant for semi?
Date: Fri, 04 Oct 1996 21:24:22 -0400
Organization: SNET Internet: http://www.snet.net/
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: brpt01-sh4-port221.snet.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

i will be setting up a mobile hf rig in my truck. does anybody have any
suggestions for an antenna. rig is capable of 10-160 meters with built
in auto-tuner. truck is a kenworth t-800 conventional day cab and i pull
a tank trailer. antenna will probably be mounted on back of cab. top off
cab is about 9' high. thanks for any suggestions!
                                73 tim n1xup


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:10 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!cs.utexas.edu!wotan.compaq.com!twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com!news
From: Monty Wilson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: mobile hf ant for semi?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (System Administrator)
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: very little
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 14:39:39 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: monty.pc.hou.compaq.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 11

If you go with a bug catcher, the antenna consists of a mast, then
the large coil on top, then a long whip.  There may be another
mast and capacity hat on top of the coil, depending on whether
you optimize the system for the low bands or the higher ones.
I hear that the optimal installation is to get the coil to the
top of the vehicle if possible.

--
.........Monty.
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:11 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!munnari.OZ.AU!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news.encore.com!psoper
From: [e-mail] (Pete Soper)
Subject: Re: Modeling "thick" wires
Organization: Encore Computer Corporation
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 00:46:26 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: sysgem1.encore.com
References: <[e-mail]> <53ij1s$[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Usenet News)
Lines: 17

Thanks to all who sent advice and info about this. Using the two wire
formula posted, I found that my ladderline example comes out to
around 1/4 inch effective diameter and this gives me the bandwidth I
need on 80 meters. One interesting thing I found with EZNEC is that
the parasitic element doesn't have to be thick to get the bandwidth
benefit (there may be an effect, but it is small). So with shorted ladderline
as a driven element and #14 wire as a parasitic (on the knife-edge of being
reflector or director) I get nice birectional gain and the 100khz bandwidth
I need.

Now when I stick these wires up on a real EE dept rooftop with I-beams
and air conditioner gadgets all over, we'll see what happens. But
at least I've got some understanding of the ideal performance.

Regards,
Pete
KS4XG


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:11 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: need a 160m "compromise" antenna ???
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 16:14:46 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 21
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)

Floyd Lucas wrote:
> I want to put up a 160 meter antenna but don't have much space. About 110 fo
ot
> by 75 foot lot. Tried an end fed wire, didn't work that good. (lousy actuall
y)

   +---------------------------------------+
   |                   102ft               |
   |                                     3 |
   |                                     0 |
                                         f +---
                                         t +--- 9 ohms resistive
   |                                       |
   |                                       |
   |                                       |
   +---------------------------------------+

Hi Floyd, here's a vertical rectangle that would fit. I modeled it on 40ft
poles with EZNEC and got an almost omni pattern with a low angle of
radiation and more gain than a full-sized vertical. Bonus is, if you
short the ends, you have a full-wave loop on 75m.

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


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:12 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!hobbes.cc.uga.edu!news
From: [e-mail] (Ignacy Misztal)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: need a 160m "compromise" antenna ???
Date: 10 Oct 1996 12:07:09 GMT
Organization: University of Georgia
Lines: 19
Distribution: inet
Message-ID: <53iotd$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ignacy Misztal)
NNTP-Posting-Host: num.ads.uga.edu
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.00

>John KI4ROFloyd Lucas wrote:
>>
>> I want to put up a 160 meter antenna but don't have much space. About 110 f
oot
>> by 75 foot lot. Tried an end fed wire, didn't work that good. (lousy actual
ly)
>>
>> any ideas???
>>
>> thanks

I suspect that a 100 ft long dipole fed by a ladder line and with a
decent tuner would be acceptable. I used a 70 ft dipole in such an
arrangement with a MFJ 1.5 KW tuner, and I worked coast to coast. A
100 ft dipole woud be a few times more efficient than a 70 ft dipole.

Ignacy Misztal              Ham radio: NO9E, SP8FWB
E-mail: [e-mail]
University Of Georgia, 203 L-P Bldg., Athens, GA 30602
tel. [phone]



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:13 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!cs.utexas.edu!wotan.compaq.com!twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com!news
From: Monty Wilson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: need a 160m "compromise" antenna ???
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (System Administrator)
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: very little
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 13:56:30 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: monty.pc.hou.compaq.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 38

Any antenna on 160 is a compromise.

[e-mail] (Floyd Lucas) wrote:
>I want to put up a 160 meter antenna but don't have much space. About 110 foo
t
>by 75 foot lot. Tried an end fed wire, didn't work that good. (lousy actually
)
>
>any ideas???

A dipole and 100 watts just doesn't cut it on 160.  I can tell you from
experience.  An HF6V with the 160 meter kit doesn't cut it either; I've
tried that too.  The first antenna I've tried that gets me more than the
standard "I can hear someone WAAAY back in there, sounds like he doesn't
have his amp tuned up right; so what were you saying Joe?" is a full wave
loop skywire (horizontally-oriented loop) up 25'.  But the 370-foot
perimeter of your place doesn't have enough space to house the 550' of
wire you'll need for a skywire for 160.  Most people will recommend an
inverted L, with as much wire as you can muster, up as high as you can
get it, and fed with as big an amp as you can afford.  The amp is
important, as on 160 there is so much static and noise that you have to
use your RF attenuator and the other guy needs to be using an amp under
most conditions.  I go barefoot but I only get on the band on those
mornings when the band is quietest, and I run a little speech compression.
The skywire helps out too.

I don't suppose you have a neighbor who'd let a corner of a wire come
over his place?

If not, I'd recommend you string up a wire loop, as big and as high as
you can get it, for receiving.  And for transmitting, make a gamma match
to load up your tower (preferably 75' or taller, but whatever you have)
and use an amplifier.  I've heard many stations configured this way and
their owners rave about them.

--
.........Monty.
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:14 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.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] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: need a 160m "compromise" antenna ???
Date: 11 Oct 1996 15:28:22 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 27
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <53m74m$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <[e-mail]>, KI4RO John <[e-mail]>
writes:

>Floyd,
>       Put up a TEE.  This is not a compromise antenna.  I've already
bagged
>Israel and Franz Josef Land with it this season running only 100w.  Run
>an 80 foot horizontal wire and from the middle of it solder the vertical
>element.  The horizontal piece is a capacity hat and also makes the
>antenna a bit longer which gives it a broadband frequency response.  If
>you can get up 40 feet of vertical you'll need about 20 microhenries of
>inductance to get it to load.  Feed it with 50 ohm coax and put down as
>good a radial system as you can.
>This is an idea out of one of Bill Orr's, W6SAI, books and it works
>great!
>
>Hope to cu on the TOP BAND soon.
>
>73
>John KI4ROFloyd Lucas wrote:

Feed the thing with coax or twinlead, and use the flat top as a dipole on
higher bands! Tie the feedline wires together for 160 and use it as a T.

Then you have two antennas in one.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:15 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!gatech!csulb.edu!news.sgi.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.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: Need info on screwdriver antennas
Date: 9 Oct 1996 19:06:58 GMT
Organization: Cornell University/NR
Lines: 39
Sender: [e-mail] (Verified)
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <53gt4i$[e-mail]>
References: <533vdb$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ascension.cit.cornell.edu
X-UserAgent: Nuntius v1.1.1d7
X-XXDate: Wed, 9 Oct 96 20:14:57 GMT

In article <5370ql$[e-mail]> bob puharic, [e-mail] writes:
>
>I have to add one note though. TJ antennas got a bad shipment of
>toroids...the original one that came with my antenna was bad, and the
>replacement they sent is likewise bad. THIS IS A BIG PAIN IN THE ASS.
>At this point i would probably consider the high sierra. Im getting
>tired of having paid 265 bux for an antenna that's unusable.
>

I'm just in the process of mounting and testing my new BB3, and getting
some odd results - what are the symptoms of the bad toroid? That might
explain a few things.

Also, is everyone mounting  the coil at the bottom, essentially a base
loaded antenna? Has anyone tried a mast on the bottom for about 4 feet,
then the coil, and shortened stinger? I'm playing with that some (seems
to be the aim of the original DK3) and don't know if that's the problem,
a bad toroid, or what. I don't get very clear resonances in the 6-14 mhz
range, but I can tune it to 80 meters ok, and follow the swr dip up to
about 6 mhz - then it just kind of goes away. Also have a strange
resonance at about 12 mhz that doesn't move when I slide the coil in and
out.

And here's another question that I've been thinking about. If I cut the
whip short enough to tune up to 24-28 mhz, it will be short for 40 (less
efficient than a longer one) and really short for 80, might not even tune
there. I could put on a long whip for 80/40, but I won't be able to get
up on the higher frequencies. Is it possible to put two whips on
(actually thinking about a short whip, and a longer wire forward) ala the
spider style antennas with the multiple whips? At the low end of the
frequency range, the long wire and a moderate amount of coil would
resonate. At the high end, the shorter whip and very little or no coil
would resonate. Any reason this wouldn't work? I'd presume the 'other'
radiator would accept little power where it wasn't resonant, and even if
it did accept power - all it does is radiate it, and that's what I want!
Anybody tried this kind of scheme? That seems to be what some of the Don
Johnson designs in his mobile antenna book did.

73 de Kevin ,WB2EMS.


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:17 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.uoregon.edu!mars.efn.org!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Dick Hughes)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need info on screwdriver antennas
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 20:55:40 GMT
Organization: Oregon Public Networking
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <533vdb$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <53gt4i$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dynip111.efn.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.299

On 9 Oct 1996 19:06:58 GMT, F. Kevin Feeney <[e-mail]> wrote:

>In article <5370ql$[e-mail]> bob puharic, [e-mail] writes:
>>
>>I have to add one note though. TJ antennas got a bad shipment of
>>toroids...the original one that came with my antenna was bad, and the
>>replacement they sent is likewise bad. THIS IS A BIG PAIN IN THE ASS.
>>At this point i would probably consider the high sierra. Im getting
>>tired of having paid 265 bux for an antenna that's unusable.
>>
>
>I'm just in the process of mounting and testing my new BB3, and getting
>some odd results - what are the symptoms of the bad toroid? That might
>explain a few things.


Can't load the antenna.  SWR all over the place.  Make sure your
toroid is CLOSE to the base.  I mean leads like 1/2".


>And here's another question that I've been thinking about. If I cut the
>whip short enough to tune up to 24-28 mhz, it will be short for 40 (less
>efficient than a longer one) and really short for 80, might not even tune
>there. I could put on a long whip for 80/40, but I won't be able to get
>up on the higher frequencies. Is it possible to put two whips on
>(actually thinking about a short whip, and a longer wire forward) ala the
>spider style antennas with the multiple whips? At the low end of the
>frequency range, the long wire and a moderate amount of coil would
>resonate. At the high end, the shorter whip and very little or no coil
>would resonate. Any reason this wouldn't work?

>73 de Kevin ,WB2EMS.

I  have two whips with quick disconnects for that purpose.  It is
possible to load on 10-meters with a long whip, but you have to tune
the coil close to the 75-meter band.

Dick Hughes - W6CCD


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:17 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!netaxs.com!usenet
From: "William Kapp Clark" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Newbie AM Antenna question
Date: 10 Oct 1996 16:21:40 GMT
Organization: Net Access - Philadelphia's Original ISP
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <01bbb6c7$620718c0$080a6acf@billclar>
NNTP-Posting-Host: l8.axs2000.net
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

I need to build/acquire an antenna to pick up distant AM, from Philadelphia
to Cincinatti, frequency 1530 KHZ.
..
Is it possible to improve the signal I currently receive using the built-in
antenna of my Yamaha receiver ? Is it wworth it ? I record the program at
night, and sometimes, the noise completely washes the signal out. The
internal antenna is at ground level.
..
Any help would be appreciated, or, perhaps a referenct to a FAQ.

Many Thanks

[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:19 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.enteract.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: Koert Koelman <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Oct 12 Radio Auction San Mateo, CA
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 22:58:33 -0700
Organization: N/A
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: smx-ca8-42.ix.netcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri Oct 11 12:58:25 AM CDT 1996
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

On October 12, 1996, the Palo Alto Amateur Radio Association
(PAARA) will hold its 45st annual auction and flea market at the
San Mateo Shriners Center, 1925 Elkhorn Court, San Mateo, CA.
Doors open at 7:30 A.M. and the auction will start around 9:30
A.M.

Ham radio gear, electronic parts and test equipment is likley to
change hands at bargain prices.  Raffle prizes will be offered
and coffee & donuts will be served.  All in all it will be a lot
of fun for those of you who have the post Foothill Flea Market
blues.

Flea market table space is available at $10 per table.  Auction
charges are 10% of the sales price (buy-back subject to $5/max.
charge per lot).  Equipment donations are welcomed by the club.
Proceeds benefit PAARA.

Directions to the Shriners' Center.  From HWY 101 or 280, take
the HWY 92 to the El Camino Real South exit.  On the El Camino
Real travel to 20th Avenue, where you'll turn right.  One block
and you'll see Elkhorn Court.  Talk-in frequency is 147.45
simplex.

Please, note the location this year ... it is in San Mateo.  See
you there.

Koert KC6WCI


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:19 1996
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 21:55:02 +1000
From: "Paul Demarchi" <[e-mail]>
Subject: programs for yagi tv antenna construction
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Message-ID: <01bbb2b5.19e540a0$LocalHost@default>
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1085
NNTP-Posting-Host: 139.134.57.139
Lines: 3
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!agate!newsgate.duke.edu!news.duq.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!newsflash.concordia.ca!canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca!pumpkin.pangea.ca!news.mira.net.au!vic.news.telstra.net!act.news.telstra.net!nsw.news.telstra.net!139.134.5.33!

does anyone have or know of a good program for tv antenna construction?
would appreciate any information.



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:20 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!enews.sgi.com!news.sgi.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!nntp.earthlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-ana-24.sprintlink.net!ratty.wolfe.net!usenet
From: Ramon Gandia <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Quad Spreaders...
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 1996 22:51:35 -0800
Organization: Anvil Technology
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: nome-ts1-p03.nome.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Howard Wick wrote:
>
> Has anyone ever used PVC pipe for a hf Quad Ant? If so, How did they
> work?

It's too flexy.  Might work for a 10 meter quad.....then again,
maybe not.

But try this.  Make your spreaders out of aluminum, with the last
few feet out of pvc.  It might be rigid enough this way.  Be sure
that the aluminum sections do not resonate at any frequency of
interest.  For instance, if your aluminum portion, from tip, to boom
and back to tip, is under 15 feet, it will not resonate on any freq
below 30 mHz.  A 20 meter quad needs about 23 ft spreaders, so if
you use 15 ft aluminum with pvc ends each projecting 4 ft, it might
work.  Insert a wood dowel partways if too flexy.  It sure beats
the price of fiberglass poles!  Let us know how you make out.

Ramon, AL7X  e-mail to:  rfg.at.nome.dot.net  <--to foil SpamBots!


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:23 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!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!news3.agis.net!agis!NEWS!not-for-mail
From: Bob Lewis <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Question on HAMSTICK
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 1996 07:40:22 -0400
References: <533anu$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Organization: AA4PB
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 36

Jory McIntosh, KB5UBS wrote:
>
> Frank Sved wrote:
> >
> > A friend told me he uses a ham stick and it works well.
> >
> > It is a fiberglass section with a metal whip on top.  Whip is ajustable
> > for tuning.  Fiberglass section is loaded I believe.
> >
> > The base is a threaded 3/4" stud.
> >
> > Are these really any good for 80m?
> > --
> >
> >   Bye for now, Frank Sved (VE3GID) at [e-mail]
>
> The Ham sticks are great for 40 to 10 meters, I have been running them
> for a couple of years now.  I have had some terrible luck getting my 75
> meter Ham stick to show a decent SWR.  There is a tuning coil out on the
> market now that is claimed to help with tuning the 75 meter ham stick.  I
> have not tried this so I am not sure if it works or not.  I have managed
> to make a few contacts on 75 by running an antenna tuner.
>
> I say all in all, the ham sticks are pretty good for their size, (its
> better than haveing some huge ugly looking thing attached to your car).
> I have found that no matter what band you run with the ham sticks make
> darn sure that you have the antenna is placed on a metal surface, the
> better the ground plane, the better the antenna is going to work.
>
> Gud Luck and 73
> Jory McIntosh
> KB5UBS

I use a 50 ohm to 25 ohm unbalanced to unbalanced broad-band transformer
(UNUN) at the base of my hamsticks - SWR very near 1:1 at resonance on
all bands including 75 meters.



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:23 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news1.agis.net!news3.agis.net!agis!NEWS!not-for-mail
From: Bob Lewis <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Question on HAMSTICK
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 11:57:49 -0400
References: <533anu$[e-mail]>
Organization: AA4PB
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 17

Frank Sved wrote:
>
> A friend told me he uses a ham stick and it works well.
>
> It is a fiberglass section with a metal whip on top.  Whip is ajustable
> for tuning.  Fiberglass section is loaded I believe.
>
> The base is a threaded 3/4" stud.
>
> Are these really any good for 80m?
> --
>
>   Bye for now, Frank Sved (VE3GID) at [e-mail]

Bug Catcher better than Hamstick on 75, 3 ele beam is better than the
Bug Catcher - It's all what you are willing to trade off. Can you make
contacts with the Hamstick? Yep!



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:24 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!hearst.acc.Virginia.EDU!alison.sbc.edu!alison.sbc.edu!nntp
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Question on HAMSTICK
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: "Kenneth D. Grimm" <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 14:08:32 -0700
References: <533anu$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Organization: Sweet Briar College
Nntp-Posting-Host: 198.28.36.115
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win16; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
CC: [e-mail]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 24

Cecil Moore wrote:
>
> Jory McIntosh, KB5UBS wrote:
> > I say all in all, the ham sticks are pretty good for their size, (its
> > better than haveing some huge ugly looking thing attached to your car).
>
> Hi Jory, it's lots better to have some huge beautiful looking
> thing attached to your car.
>
> 73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)

I once tried to attach her to the car, but she made such a fuss that
I gave up on the idea.

73,
Ken
--
___________________________________________________________

       Kenneth D. Grimm                 K4XL
       [e-mail]
___________________________________________________________




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:25 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.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: Radial Field Connection
Date: 11 Oct 96 06:43:30 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

On 160m I use an inverted L with 60 radials. After a number of years
the ground rod and clamp arrangement I have used to connects the
radials at the base of the L looks pretty questionable and I am going
to replace it.  I am looking for suggestions on different ways to do
this.  Soldering or bolting radials to a copper ground screen would
be wonderful, but I don't have or know where to obtain such a screen.
 I don't particularly like the idea of connecting to a chicken wire
or hardware cloth screen either.  All suggestions appreciated.


Bob AA2UV


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:26 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!news.sgi.com!spool.mu.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!hobbes.cc.uga.edu!news
From: [e-mail] (Ignacy Misztal)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Roof mounted tribander
Date: 10 Oct 1996 12:03:26 GMT
Organization: University of Georgia
Lines: 17
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <53iome$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ignacy Misztal)
NNTP-Posting-Host: num.ads.uga.edu
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.00

I would like to put up a light tribander, such as A3S.  Because the
house in on a slope, and I can erect the tower only on the lower side,
a 40 ft ground-set tower would be at the same height as a 10 ft roof
tower.  Also, trees prohibit puting the ground-set tower far away from
the house.  Therefore I set my mind on a roof tower.  Has anyone have
experience with such towers holding a tribander?  Is roof
reinforcement necessary?  Any horror or good stories?  A roof tower
can easily cost $200.  Is a TV roof mount sufficient?  Is thrust
bearing needed?  Would a brick-chimney mount be preferable from roof
mount?


Ignacy Misztal              Ham radio: NO9E, SP8FWB
E-mail: [e-mail]
University Of Georgia, 203 L-P Bldg., Athens, GA 30602
tel. [phone]



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:27 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!munnari.OZ.AU!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (EFL)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Shortened Dipole
Date: 9 Oct 96 13:21:10 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

I'm trying to put an 80m shortened dipole inside my attic to go along
with the 40m.  The dipole is fed from a balun & each side is 20'6" from
the balun to the trap and then about 15' to the end.  Total length is
almost 70'.  I know that I can fold it like a "z", however, will it work
if I fold it like the symbol of a resistor \/\T/\/\B/\/\T/\/ B=Balun,
T=Trap or a similar fold.  How about folding it back on itself? Finally,
how about straight on one leg and folded on the other?  Any help would be
greatly appreciated.
73s,
Fred Levinson KF9YL   e-mail  [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:28 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!gatech!csulb.edu!news.sgi.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!newsfeed1.aimnet.com!news.walltech.com!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!news.cyberg8t.com!usenet
From: "Robert Morton" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: pl.rec.radio,pt.rec.radio.amadorismo,rec.ham-radio,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.space,rec.radio.broa
Subject: Software for Radio / DJ's
Date: 8 Oct 1996 00:11:04 GMT
Organization: Morton Software
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <01bbb4ac$eef181c0$[e-mail]8t>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pdhost23.cyberg8t.com
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155
Xref: news2.epix.net pl.rec.radio:542 pt.rec.radio.amadorismo:452 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24529 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:17092 rec.radio.amateur.dx:343 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:32734 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:16905 rec.radio.amateur.misc:107219 rec.radio.amateur.space:7573

PRESS RELEASE

Visit http://www.gosupersonic.com to download a fully functional trial
version of SuperSonic.
SuperSonic v2.01 is a very poweful and very inexpensive alternative to
expensive radio
hardware. It can be used to create attended and fully unattended complex
audio feeds.
Beta tested on Eagle Radio Networks, SuperSonic is a powerful tool for
radio broadcasters, internet audio broadcasters, and amateur/pro disc
jockeys.

Morton Software
http://www.gosupersonic.com




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:28 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!news.mr.net!cronkite.polaristel.net!erskine-15.dialup.polaristel.net!user
From: [e-mail] (Greg Bruce)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Source for Transformer
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 22:13:24 -0423
Organization: Polaris Telcom
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: erskine-15.dialup.polaristel.net

I want to build a power supply (70a) to power a solid state amp.  If you
know of a source for an appropriate transformer (new or used) e-mail
please.

Greg
WK0B


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:29 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.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!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!btnet!btinternet!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jason Williams-Lock)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: spreaders and stand-off insulators: (where can I get them?)
Date: 6 Oct 1996 21:21:19 GMT
Organization: none
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <5397sf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: host-73-36-74.btinternet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.11

Hello !

I would like to build my own 300-ohm open-wire transmission-line as it
does not appear to be available commercially in Britain, (has anyone ever
seen this type of feeder?), anyway seeing as I can't buy it commercially I
guess I have to build it myself, well I can get the copper wire easy
enough but I would like to know if 300-ohm spacers are available and more
importantly these so-called "stand-off" insulators for running open-wire
feeder down (but kept away from metal booms) and wall to avoid interfering
with the feeder.

Any comments or suggestions welcome.

Jason,



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:30 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: The person who helped with Cubic info??????
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 10:12:21 -0500
Organization: HoloNet National Internet Access System: 510-704-1058/modem
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: 157.151.205.58
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I)

Last week (10/1 - 10/4) I put a plea for help for info on Cubic
Electronics in Ocean Side, Ca. Some very nice gentleman gave me the info
I needed. I have since had a complete system crash and lost ALL my
messages...in fact I lost 2 hard drives with everything on them. The
only thing I remember about the message was that his address started
with something like "HONT"..his name was Loenk (?), The important thing
was, he gave me the name of a guy that had worked for Cubic. He said the
guy still repaired Cubic radios for a fair price. H ealso said the guy
had a fax on during the day but in the evening it was off line. He gave
me the telephone number and all the info I needed. I can't remember
which newsgroup it was in. If he will PLEASE contact me again I would
appreciate it very much. I need the same info again.

I am posting this to all the ham and radio newsgroups to find this good
samaritan again. I sent him a thank you message, but of course that is
also gone now so I can't get the address from there.

Tommy Statham
N5HTQ


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:31 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!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: The person who helped with Cubic info??????
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 96 23:28:49 GMT
Organization: Not Enough
Lines: 27
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <53mlcj$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] wrote:
>Last week (10/1 - 10/4) I put a plea for help for info on Cubic
>Electronics in Ocean Side, Ca.

Hi Tommy,

I'm not the guy who answered the first time, but the Cubic
employee you're trying to reach is Rick Jacinth. He's located
in Oceanside, CA, at [phone].

Also, bound service manuals are available from:

         Brock Publications
         P.O. Box 5004
         Oceanside, CA  92052
         [phone]

If you order the manual, be sure to mention that you want them to
include the literature for the power supply also.

Incidentally, I've designed a couple mods for the Astro 103 that
you might be interested in.  Rick has copies of the changes,
although I'm not sure whether he's doing any of this routinely.
If you talk to him, tell him I said hello.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:32 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news1.best.com!news.zeitgeist.net!wizard.pn.com!news.gte.com!news-in.tiac.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!lou.teclink.net!usenet
From: "Tom C. Brown, Jr." <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Vertical Comparison - R7 vs GAP
Date: Fri, 04 Oct 1996 14:24:07 -0500
Organization: TECLink Internet Services: [e-mail]
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: tc2_40.teclink.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; U)

Well, I've seen lots of postings about the relative merits of one
vertical over another, and I've contributed my two cents from time to
time, but finally I have some actual measurements to post.

I have a GAP Challenger DX-VIII that is ground mounted, and a Cushcraft
R7 that is mounted just a little above the roof on a mast, so that the
tops of both antennas are fairly near the same height.

I was particularly interested in the comparison of the two on 20 meters
and 40 meters, and particularly in the CW portions of the two bands.

So, I got the assistance of a highly capable SWL who is within "direct
path" range, and he made a series of measurements for me.

I fed exactly the same amount of power to each of the two antennas, one
at a time, and he watched the output on an oscilloscope and recorded the
signal levels.

On 40 meters, the received signal strength was *identical* between the
two.  No measurable difference at all.

On 20 meters, with the R7 at the very edge of its 2:1 bandwidth, there
was a grand total of 1.14 dB difference, with the GAP being the stronger
of the two.  But, by only 1.14 dB.

Not earth-shaking information, but interesting nevertheless.....

GL DX!

Tom KJ5IE


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:33 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!g6iqm.demon.co.uk!g6iqm
From: Michael J Wooding <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: uk.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: VHF Communications Magazine
Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 21:13:07 +0100
Organization: VHF Communications Magazine
Lines: 22
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: g6iqm.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: g6iqm.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 3.00 <i1Lea2xMjfCHljb3rrZXztuLaX>
Xref: news2.epix.net uk.radio.amateur:15900 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24556 rec.radio.amateur.dx:345 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:32756 rec.radio.amateur.misc:107249

Hi There,

To all our subscribers, please note that issue 3/1996 inland and surface
has been shipped over the last 2 days. Air mail deliveries will be
shipped tomorrow (07/10/96).

An index of the contents of this issue can be found on our WWW sites, as
can details of subscribing to the magazine for anyone who may be
interested.

http://www.eolas.co.uk/ag/vhfcomm.htm
http://www.clearlight.com/~vhfcomm
http://www.g6iqm.demon.co.uk/vhfcomm.htm

73 ... Mike

--
Michael J Wooding G6IQM     email: [e-mail]
http://www.eolas.co.uk/ag/vhfcomm.htm & http://www.clearlight.com/~vhfcomm
KM Publications, 5 Ware Orchard, Barby, Nr.Rugby, CV23 8UF, UK
Tel: [phone]     Fax: [phone]
VHF Communications Magazine - Especially covering VHF, UHF and Microwaves


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:34 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!lade.news.pipex.net!pipex!tube.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Walt Davidson)
Newsgroups: uk.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: VHF Communications Magazine
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 11:30:51 GMT
Organization: home in Tewkesbury
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ao066.du.pipex.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/16.299
Xref: news2.epix.net uk.radio.amateur:15901 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:24572 rec.radio.amateur.dx:347 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:32778 rec.radio.amateur.misc:107279

Michael J Wooding <[e-mail]> wrote:

>An index of the contents of this issue can be found on our WWW sites, as
>can details of subscribing to the magazine for anyone who may be
>interested.

Now that *is* coming very close to "commercial advertising on Usenet",
Mike!

:-)

73 de G3NYY

--
Walt Davidson               E-mail: [e-mail]
                                    [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:35 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!uknet!warwick!ral!usenet
From: Mike Willis <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Wanted: Small Efficient 73 kHz antenna Design
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 1996 16:19:20 +0100
Organization: Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Oxon, UK
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bradman.te.rl.ac.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I)

I am hoping to get on the new UK 73 kHz band. We have been allocated
an ERP limit of 1 Watt. As I estimate my transmitter power will be only
1 kW, I am going to need a high efficiency LF antenna, say 0.1%. The
problem is, I don't have 2km of real estate, nor any 2000m towers to get
a wire aerial 1/2 wavelength above ground. A quarter wave vertical, at
1000m long, is also impractical. I can manage a 10m long vertical
monopole, but this would be ridiculously inefficient.

Other choices are magnetic loops, horizontal loops, loaded verticals,
short dioples. A simple magnetic loop of practical dimensions may manage
only -60 dB gain and would require a megawatt of drive. Vertical
polarisation is essential for ground wave propagation.

Does anyone here have any suggestions for a suitable antenna for a small
suburban lot ?

73 Mike


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:35 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!hookup!news.nstn.ca!newsflash.concordia.ca!sunqbc.risq.net!pegasus.odyssee.net!news
From: "Nick" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Which type of antenna to build ?
Date: 6 Oct 1996 04:28:29 GMT
Organization: Odyssee Internet
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <01bbb33e$f3b525a0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pool15_16.odyssee.net
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

I have a 150-151 MHz  tranceiver mobile VHF.  It has 30Watts of output
power..

Now, I need to build a BASE ANTENNA.   Which type should I use. (I want to
be omni-directional).   Can you refer me to an easy and precise source of
information ?

Thanks.

Boby


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 12 11:49:37 1996
Path: news2.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!nntp.coast.net!news00.sunet.se!sunic!mn6.swip.net!mn5.swip.net!news
From: Maude Schyffert <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Which type of antenna to build ?
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 19:08:51 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb33e$f3b525a0$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup110-3-12.swipnet.se
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
NNTP-Posting-User: ca371ac9c2b9db57d345c213928e7f29
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b6Gold (Win16; I)
To: Nick <[e-mail]>

Nick wrote:
>
> I have a 150-151 MHz  tranceiver mobile VHF.  It has 30Watts of output
> power..
>
> Now, I need to build a BASE ANTENNA.   Which type should I use. (I want to
> be omni-directional).   Can you refer me to an easy and precise source of
> information ?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Boby

I┤m not shure its worth the money to build the antenna, you are close to
144-148 hamband and a commersilly made ham-antenna would do the job,
depending on the gain you need you can use a 1/4 lamba gp ---- to a 2-3
stacked 5/8 lamba.....

M  /   SM0BKZ


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 09:59:36 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2/3 BOBTAIL CURTAIN anyone tried ?
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 11:25:57 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.122.62
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

Gary Coffman wrote:
> What exactly are the advantages of this antenna form...

Hi Gary, one other big advantage that this has over other
antennas is it is end-fed, i.e. close to the shack/house.
For all the people struggling with RF problems from end-fed
"long-wires", a delta-loop solves the problems of feedline
radiation, RF in the shack, etc. because it is a closed loop.
Assume a person has a 60ft end-fed with the braid floating.
Hanging an 80ft drooping wire from the braid to the other end
of the "long-wire" will result in a good 40m antenna free of
grounding problems and it will work on 20m, 15m, 12m, 10m (and
even 75m by breaking the loop in the center).

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


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 09:59:38 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!nrnegus.demon.co.uk!nrnegus
From: Nicholas Negus <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 23-cm packet link Antenna ?????
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 12:50:49 +0100
Organization: Home
Lines: 39
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: nrnegus.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: nrnegus.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 3.00 <gFCpp4XJvWc15njtBfLe2+klpv>

In article <[e-mail]>, "Gary W. Halpain"
<[e-mail]> writes
>I am setting up a 23-cm packet link and am looking for plans of a suitable
>antenna for its location.  The site will be hi in the mountains and have a lo
t
>of ice and snow in the winter months.  I think my best choice would be either

>a J-pole or a grand plane corner reflector.
>
>If I use a J-pole I would probably make it out of 3/8 copper tubing or if I
>decide
>on the corner reflector it would probably be made with stainless steel.  I
>think I would like the corner reflector better for it has more gain.
>
>Can anyone help me out with plans for either or both types of 23-cm antennas,
>or does anyone have any ideas of what type of antenna would be better for thi
s
>type of application in the mountains.
>
>de Gary / KC7HXC
>kc7hxc @ seanet.com
>
Hi Gary,
I've had a similar problem here in the UK. We found a local amateur who
manufactures loop Yagi's;  They come in lengths of 1 metre up to a
maximum of 4 mtr - very directional and loads of gain. I assume you are
putting on a link and not omni access??
By putting up the Yagi in its "open" state, it iced up completely and
was useless - it took a week to thaw out!
We solved the problem by sleeving in 4 inch plastic water pipe, sealed
with a bung in each end. We modified the beam - which has a 1/2 inch
square boom by spiral wrapping a seed-tray heater element along its
length. These come in 240/110/24/12 volt versions from a good hardware
store. Obviously we only turn it on during the winter!! This keeps the
inside of the pipe warm and stops ice forming on the outside.
You need to supply it with DC - I'll let you work out what happens if
you use AC!!!
Don't forget that the wind loading goes up due to the pipe face area;
You need good clamps and stainless steel bolts etc. Good luck>

--
Nicholas Negus


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 09:59:39 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.mindspring.com!mindspring!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!metro.atlanta.com!news.radio.org!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: 2m mobile antenna & lack of ground
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 11:04:05 GMT
Lines: 24

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (charles copela
nd) writes:
>I wonder about the SWR and efficiency of 1/4 and 5/8 wave mobile
>antennas that don't have direct contacts to the cars frame.
>
>Seems that none of these antennas have provisions to add a strap to the
>chassis.
>
>I know my HF mobile whip won't work at all without this strap.
>
>Why don't mobile 2m antennas absolutely require the ground strap?

The magmount base offers sufficient capacitance to the body to
make a low impedance RF connection. Since the reactance of a
capacitor is inversely proportional to frequency, at low frequencies
the base doesn't offer a low enough reactance to form a low
impedance connection to the body, so you need to use a mechanical
connection.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 09:59:40 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.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: 300-ohm Twin-lead OK?
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 15:30:29 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup121-4-5.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 3.0Gold (Win16; I)
To: Hal Rosser <[e-mail]>

Hal Rosser wrote:
>
> Hi folks: I have about a 150 ft run to my vertical and run about 5w
> pwr. I looked up the loss associated with different feed lines and have
> decided to try 300-ohm twin-lead. (I try out my ideas on the CB bands so
> if i mess up a radio it'll only cost me $30 or so.) I'm now trying out
> 2 of those tv transformers (75/300ohm) to get the impedence somewhat in
> line.. (right now I just have two of them back-to-back testing their
> reliability) they seem to work ok at 4 watts at 27 mhz.
>   Question is : Has anybody tried the tv transformers at higher wattages?

That will not work, it'll burn. Try a 1:6 balun in each end, you can
make that of coax. Any antenna ahndbook will give you more.

> and if so how high ? and how much wattage can 300-ohm twinlead take ?
>   (they seem to work ok at 11 m and 4 watts, but I'm hesitant to hook my
> 100w HF rig up to it.) Anone have any insight on this ?
> thanks Hal KT4QE

100 W is no problem, you can rum 500 but make shure it's balanced.

SM0BKZ


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 09:59:40 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!usenet
From: "Jeff Corey" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 440 mhz Ringo Question
Date: 17 Oct 1996 20:22:08 GMT
Organization: MCSNet Services
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <01bbbc68$8b6e4160$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: corey.pr.mcs.net
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

I have an old Cushcraft 440 mhz Ringo antenna I recently put back up.  I
have lost the adjustment instructions long ago...... Does anyone have the
trimming info handy?  I am getting 4w back from approx 35-40w out and think
I could adjust the VSWR a little better.  Adjustment of the "gamma match"
ring seemed to have little effect.

Jeff Corey
WB9KAZ

Fishfar 440 repeater, 442.900/442.925/442.975/146.925 Chicago area


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 09:59:41 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.whidbey.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (David M Schertzer)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 6m antenna! (never used)
Date: 12 Oct 1996 14:49:27 GMT
Organization: DND
Lines: 13
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <53ob5n$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: asn46.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] Sat Oct 19 09:59:42 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 9913 Maximum voltage
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 96 08:18:52 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53imng$[e-mail]> <01bbb71a$5aaadb40$02102399@peter-s>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1d.delphi.com
X-To: "Peter Gottlieb" <[e-mail]>

"Peter Gottlieb" <[e-mail]> writes:

>So the true answer lies in the application..

Indeed it does. With an SWR of 10:1, a 600v maximum rating
will be violated at 720 watts, assuming Vavg=SQRT(Vmax*Vmin)

73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 09:59:43 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!hunter.premier.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [e-mail](Gerald Schmitt )
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 9913 Maximum voltage
Date: 11 Oct 1996 12:51:37 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <53lfsp$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53imng$[e-mail]> <01bbb71a$5aaadb40$02102399@peter-s> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sfe-nm2-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri Oct 11  7:51:37 AM CDT 1996

In <[e-mail]> Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
writes:
>
>"Peter Gottlieb" <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>>So the true answer lies in the application..
>
>Indeed it does. With an SWR of 10:1, a 600v maximum rating
>will be violated at 720 watts, assuming Vavg=SQRT(Vmax*Vmin)
>
>73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC

Howdy Cecil et al,

Just as an aside, having high potted literally thousands of cables my
observation is that break downs occur at or very near the connectors
in most cases. In air dielectric cables like 9913 and HJ-4 they can
also occur at bends. In straignt runs using HN rather than N connectors
I would think 9913 would take a great deal more. We tend to use 9914
instead of 9913 because of its greater resistance to damage from
bending. Using RG-214/RG-14 runs I have successfully used detector
voltages of 10KV, HN connectors and larger used through out.

                        A few observations Jerry



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 09:59:44 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!news00.sunet.se!sunic!news.chalmers.se!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Hans-Christian Becker)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Active antenna for apartment?
Date: 15 Oct 1996 11:46:17 GMT
Organization: Chalmers University of Technology
Lines: 29
Sender: hcb@0.0.0.0
Message-ID: <53vti9$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: fkmac15.phc.chalmers.se
X-Posted-From: InterNews [e-mail]
X-Authenticated: hcb on POP host 0.0.0.0

Hi everyone!
I have recently moved to an apartment where it is hard to put up any
decent wire or vertical antennas (more on the wire later ;-). I
primarily want to do SW listening, since I am afraid I might generate
interference on the cable TV net (I don't have a TV myself, so I
wouldn't know). My question is:

* Will an active antenna be of any use toigether with my R71? The
conditions are lousy - a few yards of wire on the balcony do no good,
but a few more down to the playing ground (sic!) give much better
reception. They get torn down within 24h, though... The antenna would
be placed on the balcony, a few feet away from the wall, so it would
sit rather close to the concrete building...

-or-

* should I face the wrath of my neighbours and go through the hazzle of
putting up a decent wire antenna?

Many thanks & 73,
/hcb <sm6tlh>

---
Hans-Christian Becker -- [e-mail] --
Dept. of Physical Chemistry
Chalmers University of Technology
---
Physical Chemist, Ham Radio Operator (SM6TLH) & Macintosh Geek
If I only knew how to get this #$! signature feature working!


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 09:59:45 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!news.bconnex.net!news.lightlink.com!usenet
From: Jim Labrecque <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Aluminum Tubing
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 20:05:35 -0700
Organization: ART MATRIX - LIGHTLINK
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: port33.lightlink.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)

Does anyone know of a source for aluminum tubing which can be
used to build beam antennas.  I am primarily looking for tubing
with 1/2, 3/4 and 1 inch OD diameters for building VHF beams.

Thanks,  Jim, KC1RM


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 09:59:46 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!holmes.sgate.com!jekyll.sgate.com!donovanf
From: Frank Donovan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Aluminum Tubing
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 20:35:53 -0400
Organization: Southgate Internet Host
Lines: 21
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]>

Aluminum tubing is available to amateurs at wholesale prices from
Dillsburg Aeroplane Works in Dillsburg, PA.  They ship same day via UPS.
Current UPS limits allow shipment of lengths up to nine feet and weights
up to 150 pounds.  Dillsburg's phone number is readily available from
"information" and they have a nice catalog free for the asking.

73!
Frank
W3LPL
[e-mail]

On Sun, 13 Oct 1996, Jim Labrecque wrote:

> Does anyone know of a source for aluminum tubing which can be
> used to build beam antennas.  I am primarily looking for tubing
> with 1/2, 3/4 and 1 inch OD diameters for building VHF beams.
>
> Thanks,  Jim, KC1RM
>
>



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 09:59:47 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.nkn.net!tejas
From: [e-mail] (Herb Blair)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Aluminum Tubing
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 96 02:07:05 GMT
Organization: National Knowledge Network
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <53urvi$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: app67.applink.net
X-Newsreader: News Xpress 2.0 Beta #0

In article <[e-mail]>, Frank
Donovan <[e-mail]> wrote:
also check out texas towers  (ad in QST)

>Aluminum tubing is available to amateurs at wholesale prices from
>Dillsburg Aeroplane Works in Dillsburg, PA.  They ship same day via UPS.
>Current UPS limits allow shipment of lengths up to nine feet and weights
>up to 150 pounds.  Dillsburg's phone number is readily available from
>"information" and they have a nice catalog free for the asking.
>
>73!
>Frank
>W3LPL
>[e-mail]
>
>On Sun, 13 Oct 1996, Jim Labrecque wrote:
>
>> Does anyone know of a source for aluminum tubing which can be
>> used to build beam antennas.  I am primarily looking for tubing
>> with 1/2, 3/4 and 1 inch OD diameters for building VHF beams.
>>
>> Thanks,  Jim, KC1RM
>>
>>
>


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 09:59:48 1996
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Aluminum Tubing
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 08:11:58 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
NNTP-Posting-Host: cdial22.hsonline.net
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Lines: 12
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.fibr.net!news.world-net.net!alpha.comsource.net!news.cioe.com!news.hsonline.net!cdial22.hsonline.net

Jim Labrecque <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Does anyone know of a source for aluminum tubing which can be
>used to build beam antennas.  I am primarily looking for tubing
>with 1/2, 3/4 and 1 inch OD diameters for building VHF beams.

>Thanks,  Jim, KC1RM

Most hardware stores carry several different diameter aluminum tubing.
Different sizes can be used to make telescoping beam elements that can
be adjusted with an SWR meter.



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 09:59:49 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!nntp.crl.com!acara.snsnet.net!news.scott.net!usenet
From: Bill Levey <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Amateur Vendor Directory
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 10:18:22 -0500
Organization: BRO dot NET Internet Marketing
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup35.scott.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Comprehensive directory of Amateur Radio merchants conducting business
on the web:

http://scott.net/~wa4fat/vendor.html


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 09:59:50 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!nntp.inet.fi!news.funet.fi!news.cs.hut.fi!freenet.hut.fi!mail.freenet.hut.fi!poo-boy
From: [e-mail] (Randie kochals,Toronto CANADA)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: another coax question.
Date: 16 Oct 1996 01:11:07 GMT
Organization: Freenet finland
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <541cnb$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: openet.freenet.hut.fi


Anyone have any info on RG-54 cable. I think it's 50 ohm but
I wan't to know the loss. Does anyone know?

 Thanks
 Randie



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 09:59:51 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!nntp.primenet.com!news.mindspring.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!news-w.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!news.icix.net!news.america.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Robert Haviland)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna & Propagation CDROM
Date: 14 Oct 1996 15:05:15 -0400
Organization: PSS InterNet Services, InterNet in Fl 904 253 7100
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <53u2tb$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: enterprise.america.com
Keywords: antennas, propagation, programs, cdrom
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #5

In response to several questions in the group, I invite attention to my
CDROM, W4MB antennas and propagation. It includes files of NEC, MiniNec,
Thin Wire, programs to design some 50 antennas, towers, etc, plus a number
of selected public domain programs and articles. See www.cdrom.com new
announcements for info.
Bob w4mb


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 09:59:52 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!munnari.OZ.AU!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.latrobe.edu.au!newsmgr
From: "Do   NOT  send email from this PC." <Please read the \"RULES OF USE\" above this PC>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: ANTENNA RESEARCH
Date: 16 Oct 1996 02:39:18 GMT
Organization: La Trobe University
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <541hsm$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 149.144.162.41
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)

AFTER ANY INFO ON THE DIFFERENT ANTENNA TYPES.  INFO NEEDED IS RADIATION PATTE
RN,
TYP GAINS, POLARISATION, B/W IMP CHARACTERISTICS AND TYP APPLICATIONS.

NEEDED ON FOL TYPES:
VERTICAL(MARCONI)
LONGWIRE
LOG PERIODIC
FOLDED DIPOLE
CROSSED YAGI
ANTENNA ARRAY



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 09:59:53 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.mindspring.com!mindspring!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!metro.atlanta.com!news.radio.org!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Antw: What if I trim the dipole to fit
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 10:56:04 GMT
Lines: 34

In article <[e-mail]> Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
 writes:
><[e-mail]> writes:
>>There is still a lot of confusion about SWR <> 1, but for HF there is simply
 no
>>discussion neccesary, since losses from standing waves are neglectably low.
>
>Let's take a case where the above statement is not true. Someone
>a few days ago, wanted to use a coax-fed 20m half-wave dipole as
>an all band antenna. I modeled it on 10m and EZNEC said an SWR of
>17:1. With 100ft of RG-58 that would result in about 6dB of
>attenuation, or 75% of the power lost in the coax. Granted, it is
>only about 1.5 'S' units but not "negligibly low" IMO.
>
>We must be careful about blanket statements. "Negligible losses"
>means different things to different people. Each person needs
>to estimate their losses and decide for themselves whether it
>is negligible or not.
>
>73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC

That's right, Cecil, but considering that the major loss is the
120+ db path loss, 6 db can look pretty insignificant. That's
especially true at HF where we rarely operate near the noise
floor. The story is different at VHF+, where we often do operate
near the noise floor. At HF, even +/- 20 db is often insignificant,
as witness mobile installations with 1% efficient antennas. We
do need to keep all this in perspective. A few db can matter,
but it often doesn't.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 09:59:54 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antw: What if I trim the dipole to fit
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 96 10:57:50 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1b.delphi.com
X-To: Gary Coffman <[e-mail]>

Gary Coffman <[e-mail]> writes:

>do need to keep all this in perspective. A few db can matter,
>but it often doesn't.

Hi Gary, you're absolutely correct and were careful to choose
the words "can" and "often". My objection was to the implication
that losses in coax at HF *never* matter. Last night, talking
to Jim, KC5RJN, I would not have missed 20% of what he said
if he had just been 2 'S' units higher. Seems to me that about
half the time, with the other ham running 100 watts SSB, a
6 dB better signal would make quite a difference. We don't
hear the multitude of very weak signals and there's not all
that many strong signals on 40m at night (except for the
commercial stations). So nightime 40m operation tends to
hover around a threshold where 6 dB would make a difference IMO.

73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 09:59:55 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!nntp.inet.fi!news.csc.fi!vyh.fi!raateland
From: [e-mail] (Arjen Raateland)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antw: What if I trim the dipole to fit
Date: 14 Oct 96 16:43:54 EET
Organization: Finnish Environment Administration
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vyh21.vyh.fi

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Gar
y Coffman) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]> Cecil Moore <[e-mail]
m> writes:
>><[e-mail]> writes:
>>>There is still a lot of confusion about SWR <> 1, but for HF there is simpl
y no
>>>discussion neccesary, since losses from standing waves are neglectably low.

>>
>>Let's take a case where the above statement is not true. Someone
>>a few days ago, wanted to use a coax-fed 20m half-wave dipole as
>>an all band antenna. I modeled it on 10m and EZNEC said an SWR of
>>17:1. With 100ft of RG-58 that would result in about 6dB of
>>attenuation, or 75% of the power lost in the coax. Granted, it is
>>only about 1.5 'S' units but not "negligibly low" IMO.
>
> That's right, Cecil, but considering that the major loss is the
> 120+ db path loss, 6 db can look pretty insignificant. That's
>
> Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems


Surely you're going to fry the cable if out of 100 watt 75 watt is
dissipated ;-(

--... ...-- -.. . --- .... ..--- --.. .- --..
Arjen Raateland, SAS Support
Finnish Environment Institute
Helsinki, Finland
.-.-. -.-


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 09:59:55 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.portal.ca!van-bc!n1van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!news-w.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!news.csd.net!usenet
From: Richard Kiefer <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Any 30/40 meter yagis
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 20:42:22 -0700
Organization: Computer Systems Design Company
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp07.csd.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I; 16bit)

Yes, Mosley make one which work 40/30/20.  I think it is called the
S44.  Take a look at their catalog.  A bit pricey as i remember, maybe
$1000.

Good luck,
DickKiefer, K0DK


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 09:59:56 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!news.eunet.fi!jjo
From: [e-mail] (Jari Jokiniemi)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Any 30/40 meter yagis
Date: 14 Oct 1996 14:48:50 GMT
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ds10.tekla.fi
In-reply-to: Richard Kiefer's message of Sat, 12 Oct 1996 20:42:22 -0700

Thanks. This must be a new antenna as I did not find it in my old
Mosley catalogue.
--
Jari Jokiniemi, [e-mail], OH2MPO, OH3BU
Tekla Oy, Koronakatu 1, 02210 Espoo, 90-8879 474


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 09:59:57 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.scott.net!acara.snsnet.net!news7.crl.com!nntp.crl.com!howland.erols.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Kevin Muenzler)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Anyone ever use a utility pole for a tower?
Date: 15 Oct 96 14:25:32 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]



[e-mail] (Phil Roban) writes:

-Greetings, folks.

-I want to get a wooden utility pole to use as an
-antenna tower.
<snip>

-I've been quoted prices in the $250 to $1100 range,
-(which prices naturally do not include shipping or installation!)
-so that's reasonable.
-What say you?

-Thanks,

-Phil Roban n0etx
[e-mail]

I'm using one!  It works great!  Yes, it is much stronger
than a tower and needs no guy wires.  I just had
to run a #0 copper wire from the antenna to the ground.
It cost me $135 to have one delivered and installed
five years ago.  I just had to wait a couple of
weeks until they were in the area.  The local utility
company installed it for me.  I live in sand, not sandy
soil, sand so all the had to do was drill the hole and
set the pole.  For an extra $25 the installed the little
steps on the pole to make it easier to climb.
Check with your local utility company for
prices.  I was quoted $500 by an outside company that
would install a USED pole for me so your utility company
might be quite a bit cheaper.

Kevin, WB5RUE





From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 09:59:58 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!hearst.acc.Virginia.EDU!news.jmu.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (D.R. Fordham)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Anyone ever use a utility pole for a tower?
Date: 16 Oct 1996 19:32:07 GMT
Organization: James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA
Lines: 52
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <543d7n$[e-mail]>
References: <533tvs$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip41-79.pc.jmu.edu
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.8 (x86 32bit)

In article <533tvs$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>I want to get a wooden utility pole to use as an
>antenna tower.  Seems to me it could be a good deal
>stronger than the typical steel ham tower. Could have
>a micro-shack right up there.
>
>Has anyone ever done this?
>Any good advice?
>

Yes, I am using two of them, with my VHF/UHF dual bander on the
top of one, a VHF beam on the other, and an G5RV HF antenna strung
between them.  They are 50-foot poles, with 7 feet in the ground,
thus 43-foot "tower".  I ordered them with something called
"climbing spikes" already installed... these are steel 'steps'
inserted every 3 feet (offset) on opposite sides of the pole, and
are VERY handy for climbing and antenna installation.  WARNING:
even with the spikes, you still need a BELT!  The spikes simply
alleviate the need for boot spikes!

I ordered them from a local electrical contractor.  Almost every
decent-sized electrical contractor can get the poles and put them
in for you.  Mine cost $450 (for two poles), including delivery
and installation and the spikes.  The poles are pressure treated with a
creosote-type compound, supposed to last 40 years or more.  The company
that put them in for me also drilled six 1-inch holes near the top
and also gave me a bucket-full of bolts, eye-hooks, washers, and
nuts to use for installation of the antenna masts.

The only thing I had to worry about was having Miss Utility come
out and mark the ground where my underground water supply line,
gas line, phone line, and electrical service lines run.  Even
though these were on the opposite side of my yard, the electrical
contractor said he wouldn't drill unless I did that.  The drilling
and installation took about 20 minutes per pole, half of which was
making sure they were perfectly vertical.  The spikes were put in
before installation, as were the holes near the top.

Since installing them, I have climbed them several times.  Unlike
a steel guyed tower, poles tend to sway when you are at the top and
that takes some getting used to.  I install 45-foot christmas lights
hanging from the top to the ground to make a neat symmetrical
Christmas "tree" which can be seen for a mile around (I live on a
hill).  I get many compliments.  The pole also look more natural
than steel towers.  The zoning and building-code requirements for
poles are also a lot more friendly than towers.

All in all, I strongly recommend them.

-- David Fordham, KD9LA



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 09:59:59 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!nntp.primenet.com!news.mindspring.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (david l. thompson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: anyone using a simple antenna on 18 mhz?
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 04:12:51 GMT
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises, Inc.
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <53v5p9$[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb9ef$2c6290c0$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: user-168-121-41-202.dialup.mindspring.com
X-Server-Date: 15 Oct 1996 05:00:25 GMT
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

"John Grove" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>anyone using a simple antenna on 18 mhz, i wanted to try the band but would
>like something better than a dipole.

>thanxs

I use my Cushcraft 2el 40 meter beam (332 Countries) with good luck.
Competes with A3WS.  Suspect any good 40 meter antenna from dipole up
will work!  May need a tuner with solid state XCvrs.

Dave K4JRB



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:00 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!news-w.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!delta.adelphia.net!usenet
From: "John Grove" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: anyone using a simple antenna on 18 mhz?
Date: 14 Oct 1996 16:27:41 GMT
Organization: Adelphia Communications
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <01bbb9ef$2c6290c0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.151.189.53
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

anyone using a simple antenna on 18 mhz, i wanted to try the band but would
like something better than a dipole.

thanxs



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:01 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsrelay.courtave.net!news.inetnebr.com!news.mid.net!wormer.fn.net![e-mail]
From: Guy Clark <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: anyone using a simple antenna on 18 mhz?
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 04:00:15 -0500
Organization: Not Organized
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb9ef$2c6290c0$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: fsa9.fn.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I)
To: John Grove <[e-mail]>

John Grove wrote:
>
> anyone using a simple antenna on 18 mhz, i wanted to try the band but would
> like something better than a dipole.
>
> thanxs

I don't think you NEED anything better than a dipole.
It's not like you're going to need the contest multipliers, hi.
73
--
Track record is all that counts.
Guy Clark  is  [e-mail]
Try my homepage: http://members.aol.com/wb0nnk/index.htm


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:02 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.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: balun for ladder line
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 10:47:32 -0700
Organization: none
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-109.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)

Here is a suggestion for a choke balun for ladder line which is probably
as old as the hills, but maybe not.

1) Use two one-foot lengths of 75 or 90 Ohm coax.

2) Load each coax with beads (the Maxwell balun).

3) Insert the center wire of each coax in series with each of the ladder
line wires.

4) Maintain the ladder line spacing between these two coaxes.

5) At each end of each of these two coaxes, join the two braids together
with a very low impedance connection.

6) The idea is that the braids tied together at the ends provides a very
tight common mode electromagnetic coupling between the two sides of the
ladder line. This satisfies the basic requirement for a choke balun.

Bill W0IYH


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:03 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!munnari.OZ.AU!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.latrobe.edu.au!newsmgr
From: "Do   NOT  send email from this PC." <Please read the \"RULES OF USE\" above this PC>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: BALUN INFO
Date: 16 Oct 1996 02:42:27 GMT
Organization: La Trobe University
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <541i2j$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 149.144.162.41
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)

REQUEST INFO ON BALUNS:
a. FUNCTION OF A BALUN WHEN INTERFACING A TRANSMISSION LINE WITH AN ANTENNA.
b. NEED DIFFERENT EXAMPLES OF ANTENNAS.

EMAIL - [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:03 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-in2.uu.net!nntp.newsfirst.com!nntp.crosslink.net!munnari.OZ.AU!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Mark K Flanagan)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Best Antenna for 80M DX (cont.)
Date: 12 Oct 96 14:55:54 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

The 5 sloper arrangement mentioned is shown in the ARRL Antenna Book.
The
length of feed line to the relay box is critical because the unused
antennas have the feed lines shorted to create reflectors of a slightly
longer length using the feed line
to increase the length.  If I had the space I would certainly erect one.


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:05 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!feed1.news.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: Birds on the Beam
Date: 12 Oct 1996 09:23:04 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 60
Message-ID: <53no1p$[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb3e9$19b70fc0$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup505.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (FORREST
 GEHRKE) writes:
>ML> The owl bit suggested seems to actually work somewhat.   The Catholi
>ML> Church here locally has used plastic owls for years to discourage ot
>ML> from fouling the priests' quarters.
>
>OK.  But what about live owls?  I have a great horned owl who
>spends most of the night perched on my 20M beam hooting through
>the night.  How to discourage this bird?
>
>A local birder says the reason they do this is because my
>beam is the highest available perch around.
>
>The droppings consist of small rodent bones and fur!!
>//
>  k2bt
>

You're a heck of a lot better technician than I am!  Build a DSP filter that
listens for it's hooter signature.  Trigger an ultrasonic probe back at it at
altitude up there topside or perhaps a neat cat call from a VERY large
electronic CAT!  Size 13 DDD TIGER response!

I also bet that you could trigger off a STROBE light from that as well.

My bet is Mr./Ms/Mdm Owl will NOT like to have his/her/? retinal
receivers popped blind every time it calls for a mate or answers as the case
may be!

Anything that depends on light levels so low it can hunt mice in the dark is
NOT going to be very happy about popping off a strobe every time it hoots!

Pavlov said, "It's a dog eat dog world!", right?

    :)

On the less/more serious side, depending on your pwerspective, I have a
country QTH and on a clear cold night in the full moon it is a lot of fun to l
isten
to the foreplay.

Walked out of one place one October about now, maybe a little later in the
month here in town just adjacent to a post oak grove that has a colony of
them in it, one evening just about sunset.  Heard the funniest darned
"scritch, scritch, scritch" I've ever heard all going on above me on a TV
cable line!   Too dark to really see what was making all the noise, so got
a flashlight.

I'll be switched but it was FOUR baby hooters all in a line up there!  First
flight out of the box and they ALL were resting in a line on the cable.  They
were all concerend about it and the parents were calling back to them from
further up in one of the big post 50 foot post oaks!  I had no idea what kind
of conversational sound owls make until that night and don't expect to ever
hear it again..

Real prized experience...

//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:05 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.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] (SShaw48195)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Birds on the Beam
Date: 13 Oct 1996 02:54:44 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 1
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <53q3nk$[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb064$2e30f840$70c32ace@redoutey>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (SShaw48195)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

SOLUTION: KEY UP WITH 2,000 WATTS AND THE BIRDS WILL FLY AWAY!


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:06 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ridgecrest.ca.us!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Dr Pepper)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Birds on the Beam
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 23:01:23 GMT
Organization: The Scannerist
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb3e9$19b70fc0$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: annex042.ridgecrest.ca.us
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/16.299

On Thu, 10 Oct 96 16:25:00 -0300, [e-mail]
(FORREST GEHRKE) wrote:

>ML> The owl bit suggested seems to actually work somewhat.   The Catholi
>ML> Church here locally has used plastic owls for years to discourage ot
>ML> from fouling the priests' quarters.
>
>OK.  But what about live owls?  I have a great horned owl who
>spends most of the night perched on my 20M beam hooting through
>the night.  How to discourage this bird?

snippy deee deeeee

Boy, , , I'd say you have a problem!  You might want to consider a
fully loaded 410.  :-}~
Seriously, I have had the job of getting rid of pigeons in
aircraft hangars, and have had some very good luck, , , But OWLS?
I don't know. BTW, the plastic owls aren't very effective unless
you move them aroundeveryonce in a while.  The birds get
accustomed to seeing it in the same  place, and after a while,
they tend to ignore it.  If you are interested, e-mail me for a
description of my method for getting rid of pigeons.

[e-mail]

Dr Pepper
10 - 2 - 4
Good Anytime


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:10 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-feed2.bbnplanet.com!newsy.mc.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Bob Levine)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Birds on the Beam
Date: 15 Oct 1996 14:53:05 GMT
Organization: Mercury Computer System
Lines: 35
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <5408gh$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: fugu.mc.com

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(FORREST GEHRKE) writes:
-->ML> The owl bit suggested seems to actually work somewhat.   The Catholi
-->ML> Church here locally has used plastic owls for years to discourage ot
-->ML> from fouling the priests' quarters.
-->
-->OK.  But what about live owls?  I have a great horned owl who
-->spends most of the night perched on my 20M beam hooting through
-->the night.  How to discourage this bird?
-->
-->A local birder says the reason they do this is because my
-->beam is the highest available perch around.
-->
-->The droppings consist of small rodent bones and fur!!
-->//
-->  k2bt
-->
--> * RM 1.3 02583 *

1 good shot with 20ga or 28ga with #9 shot should discourage him and
his friends.

--
/*******************************************************************
 *                Bob Levine                                       *
 *                KD1GG/VK2GYN/7J1AIS                              *
 *                KB1BRM: Anti-Algonquin Amateur Radio League      *
 *                Manager of Application Engineering               *
 *                Mercury Computer Systems                         *
 * ----------------------------------------------------------------*
 * Opinions expressed in this message are my own personal opinions *
 * ----------------------------------------------------------------*
 *          Personal Web Page http://www.ultranet.com/~bob/        *
 *******************************************************************/




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:11 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.pitt.edu!news.pgh.net!usenet
From: Edward Oros <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Birds on the Beam
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 08:53:40 -0400
Organization: Pittsburgh OnLine, Inc.
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb064$2e30f840$70c32ace@redoutey> <53q3nk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp5.pgh.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b8Gold (Win95; I)

SShaw48195 wrote:
>
> SOLUTION: KEY UP WITH 2,000 WATTS AND THE BIRDS WILL FLY AWAY!

.... Was that "FLY" away or "FRY" away :?


Ed--AC3L


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:12 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsgate.compuserve.com!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!cbgw2.lucent.com!nntphub.cb.lucent.com!ssbunews.ih.lucent.com!news
From: "Frank W. van Wensveen" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Birds on the Beam, a solution
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 16:33:01 +0200
Organization: Lucent Technologies Netherlands [CONTRACTOR]
Lines: 59
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb3e9$19b70fc0$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hvsac11.nl.lucent.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.4 sun4m)

FORREST GEHRKE wrote:

> OK.  But what about live owls?  I have a great horned owl who
> spends most of the night perched on my 20M beam hooting through
> the night.  How to discourage this bird?
I have never had problems with birds on the beam (heck, I don't even
have room for a decent-sized GP, let alone anything big enough for a
bird to sit on) but we've had serious trouble with pidgeons on the
balcony fence.

What works perfect for any kind of bird is a vertical piece of rigid
plastic strip (like the (nylon?) bands used around boxes and packing
crates), which is mounted vertically on top of the beam / fence /
railing /whatever, like this:


     |
     |         Plastic strip
     |
    ---
   /   \
  |     |   Beam / fence / railing / etc
  |     |
   \___/


(The above drawing is not really to scale, I was never much of an artist
with ASCII characters.)

Because the strip prevents the bird from getting a hold on the tubing it
would like to perc on, it's no longer an attractive place to sit. It
works excellent with pidgeons and any other kind of bird we've had
trouble with. There are no horned owls around in Rotterdam, Holland, so
I can't really say much about it. The only problem I can imagine is that
those birds are so large and heavy (are they? I don't know) that the
strip will fold if it's not touch and/or rigid enough. Wind may also
become a problem if the strip is wide enough, depending on where your
antenna is located.

Needless to say, a piece of steel wire mounted about 1" above the
horizontal element of the beam would work  as well as far as birds are
concerned, but that would influence the characteristics of the beam.



--


Regards,
  Frank van Wensveen

=============================================================
Lucent Technologies [CONTRACTOR], Hilversum, The Netherlands
P.O box 1168    1200 BD  Hilversum    The Netherlands
Email: [e-mail]  Fax: [phone]
Phone (office): [phone]  (mobile) [phone]
=============================================================
            *** All standard disclaimers apply ***
=============================================================


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:13 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!news.msfc.nasa.gov!bcm.tmc.edu!news.tamu.edu!news.utdallas.edu!news01.aud.alcatel.com!usenet
From: "Kris Mraz, N5KM" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Can 70 Ohm hardline detune antennas?
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 15:29:39 -0500
Organization: Alcatel Network Systems
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: maverick.aud.alcatel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.2 sun4c)

I just installed a Force12 5BA (15 el 5-bander) at 128 ft. The first
thing I
did was to measure its SWR bandwidth with an MFJ-259 antenna analyzer in
the shack.
To my surprise the resonant frequencies had shifted on all bands; up to
500 Khz on
some bands!

I'm feeding this with 70 Ohm 3/4" CATV hardline. The antenna has three
separate
feedlines so I have pigtails (approx. 25 ft.) made of RG-213 going to a
remote switchbox. Then 200 ft. of hardline goes to the shack then a 10
ft. pigtail
of 213 makes the final connection to the rig.

So up the tower I went to connect the MFJ directly to the pigtail
coaxes. The
SWR/resonant freq on each band was right on the money (except 12m which
was
resonant below the band). Now, the only difference was the run of
hardline.
Has anyone experienced this resonance shift? If so, what is the cause?

Note: I plan on temporarily replacing the hardline with a run of 213 to
see
if this has any corrective affect. Thanks.
--

73
Kris N5KM
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:14 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-in2.uu.net!news-m01.ny.us.ibm.net!news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net!usenet
From: Stanley Chen <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Can 70 Ohm hardline detune antennas?
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 18:02:41 -0300
Lines: 49
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip166-72-160-107.sc.us.ibm.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win16; I)
To: "Kris Mraz, N5KM" <[e-mail]>

Kris Mraz, N5KM wrote:
>
> I just installed a Force12 5BA (15 el 5-bander) at 128 ft. The first
> thing I
> did was to measure its SWR bandwidth with an MFJ-259 antenna analyzer in
> the shack.
> To my surprise the resonant frequencies had shifted on all bands; up to
> 500 Khz on
> some bands!
>
> I'm feeding this with 70 Ohm 3/4" CATV hardline. The antenna has three
> separate
> feedlines so I have pigtails (approx. 25 ft.) made of RG-213 going to a
> remote switchbox. Then 200 ft. of hardline goes to the shack then a 10
> ft. pigtail
> of 213 makes the final connection to the rig.
>
> So up the tower I went to connect the MFJ directly to the pigtail
> coaxes. The
> SWR/resonant freq on each band was right on the money (except 12m which
> was
> resonant below the band). Now, the only difference was the run of
> hardline.
> Has anyone experienced this resonance shift? If so, what is the cause?
>
> Note: I plan on temporarily replacing the hardline with a run of 213 to
> see
> if this has any corrective affect. Thanks.
> --
>
> 73
> Kris N5KM
> [e-mail]

--
S

Kris, you've unintentionally built yourself a series line-matching
transformer.  The length of 50-ohm coax to your antenna and the 75-ohm
hardline form a series-section transfomer.  The 50-ohm coax back to the
shack is not a component of the transformer.  I've used this scheme a
number of times to transform a wide range of load impedances back to 50
ohms.  The popular quarter-wave matching transformer (which is only
useful for certain load and coax impedances) is actually just a special
case of the series-section transformer.  There's a good article on this
type of matching transformer in a real old issue of QST somewhere.

73, Stan N3KK
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:15 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.asu.edu!aztec.asu.edu!hamop
From: [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Can 70 Ohm hardline detune antennas?
Date: 14 Oct 1996 02:25:09 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <53s8a5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aztec.asu.edu


Stan, N3KK said -

Kris, you've unintentionally built yourself a series line-matching
transformer.  The length of 50-ohm coax to your antenna and the 75-ohm
hardline form a series-section transfomer.  The 50-ohm coax back to the
shack is not a component of the transformer.  I've used this scheme a
number of times to transform a wide range of load impedances back to 50
ohms.  The popular quarter-wave matching transformer (which is only
useful for certain load and coax impedances) is actually just a special
case of the series-section transformer.  There's a good article on this
type of matching transformer in a real old issue of QST somewhere.

Stan,
        it is also in the ARRL Antenna Book
Charlie, W7XC
--


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:16 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Choking Ladder-Line
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 96 03:50:22 GMT
Organization: Not Enough
Lines: 28
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <53n4mv$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   Cecil Moore <[e-mail]> wrote:

>We have a balun (BALanced/UNbalanced), an unun
>(UNbalanced/UNbalanced), - is there such a toroidal device as a
>balbal (BALanced/BALanced)?

Sure, I used one in my last tuner.  It consisted of two stacked
FT-240-61 cores with bifilar windings.  The windings were
connected in the configuration of an isolation transformer.  It
could have been used as a balun, an unbal, an unun, or a balbal.
Now that I think about it, the same is probably true of most
(all?) current baluns.

>What happens if one simply wraps turns of ladder-line on a
>toroid?

Sheesh Cecil, we can't even figure out how coax works.  Now
you want to know about ladder line too?  Seriously, I suspect
wrapping the line would destroy the symmetry necessary for
the device to work properly.  Passing the line once through
a stack of toroids would probably do the job, but I don't think
the effect would be as ironclad as in coax.  The fields will
never be totally confined to the cores, so it should still be
possible to unbalance the line to some extent by means of
external influences.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:17 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Choking Ladder-Line
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 96 11:44:51 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53mof7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1b.delphi.com
X-To: Roy Lewallen <[e-mail]>

Roy Lewallen <[e-mail]> writes:

>Cecil, instead of asking, why don't you give it a try and tell us what
>happens?

Hi Roy, I've read everything I can find, including your
articles and Sevick's book, and as far as I can remember,
no one has talked about running balanced lines through
toroidal cores to balance the currents. I thought maybe
someone had already run the experiments and I just didn't
know about them. Is it such a stupid idea that I would be
wasting my time to run the experiments?

Another idea is to run 300ohm ladder-line to a 6:1 balun
into a 1:1 choke/balun at the antenna. Baluns do work
backwards for receiving so will they work backwards
for transmitting? I am really ignorant in this area.

73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:17 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.nevada.edu!news.tamu.edu!news.utdallas.edu!news.starnet.net!spool.mu.edu!newspump.sol.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!scnews.sc.intel.com!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Choking Ladder-Line
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 09:21:28 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[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)

This is probably a stupid question. I've used toroids to measure the
current flowing in ladder-line. Depending on how the wire is threaded
through the toroid, I could measure either differential or common mode
currents since one or the other cancelled in the toroid internal fields.

Can I choke the common mode current without affecting the differential
current simply by passing the ladder-line through a toroidal core like
the common mode current is choked by passing coax through a toroidal core?
Seems the differential current fields would cancel in the toroid and the
common mode current fields would not cancel?

We have a balun (BALanced/UNbalanced), an unun (UNbalanced/UNbalanced),
- is there such a toroidal device as a balbal (BALanced/BALanced)?
What happens if one simply wraps turns of ladder-line on a toroid?

thanks and 73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:18 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!noos.hooked.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Choking Ladder-Line
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 96 23:29:53 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1b.delphi.com
X-To: <[e-mail]>

<[e-mail]> writes:

>Strictly speaking, there shouldn`t be any common mode currents on the ladder
>line anyway. (If there were, they will cancel anyway). So there shouldn`t be
>any need to "choke off" any common - mode currents......

Consider the classic Zepp antenna. One wire in the transmission
line ends abruptly, the other continues into the antenna.
Obviously, there is no current in the open wire and all the
current that is flowing into the antenna appears in the
other. Reckon there is any common mode currents?

73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:19 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.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: Choking Ladder-Line
Date: 13 Oct 1996 20:05:12 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 51
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <53s03o$[e-mail]>
References: <53n4mv$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <53n4mv$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>
>Sure, I used one in my last tuner.  It consisted of two stacked
>FT-240-61 cores with bifilar windings.  The windings were
>connected in the configuration of an isolation transformer.  It
>could have been used as a balun, an unbal, an unun, or a balbal.
>Now that I think about it, the same is probably true of most
>(all?) current baluns.


Of course, whether the balun is wound from coax, twisted pair, or parallel
wires...it will work the same as a choke balun.

The differential mode loss will be the same as the same length of cable in
air, and the common mode impedance is the important criteria for balancing
effectiveness and dissipation of common mode (NOT differential mode)
power.

On the other hand, isolation transformers and current baluns can be bad
news. They can dissipate differential mode power in the core.


Cecil wrote:

>What happens if one simply wraps turns of ladder-line on a
>toroid?

It makes a common mode choke, but you have to be careful. The open-wire
spacing is pretty large, and ruins things wjhen you wind it all up. You
can sucessfully wind it on a long large diameter PVC pipe, with adjacent
turns spaced at least one line width, but the choke is too big (unless it
is resonated and used on one band).

That's why I use the center conductor and insulation from PTFE RG-58 type
coax as the wire, and a stack of large high Q ferrite cores. The balun has
very high voltage breakdown and can be wound in a nice bifilar winding.
Fields are confined to the core area every bit as well as with coaxial
lines, since the outside of coaxial lines can be treated as a radiating
conductor also. We know either type of line can radiate if it carries
common mode current, and neither type will (a few wire spacings distant)
if it doesn't.

A choke like this works (with a high enough impedance core and winding
combination) very well as a choke balun for ladder line. If the common
mode impedance by some chance isn't high enough, the worse effect is a
loss of balance. It won't kill the differential mode line impedance like
voltage baluns sometimes can.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:21 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.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] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Choking Ladder-Line
Date: 14 Oct 1996 09:45:35 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 19
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <53tg5v$[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:

>Consider the classic Zepp antenna. One wire in the transmission
>line ends abruptly, the other continues into the antenna.
>Obviously, there is no current in the open wire and all the
>current that is flowing into the antenna appears in the
>other. Reckon there is any common mode currents?
>
>73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC
>
>

Of course there are, unless the end impedance of the antenna is infinite.
If the end impedance of the antenna is infinite, it indicates the antenna
does not radiate or have any loss. So if the feedline does not radiate,
the antenna can not radiate either!

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:22 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.dacom.co.kr!usenet.seri.re.kr!news.postech.ac.kr!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-11.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax as a balanced feeder?
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 09:00:21 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[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)

C. J. Hawley wrote:
> Twice the impedance of the coax

Hi Chuck, just to be sure I understand. Two parallel pieces of 90 ohm
coax would have a characteristic impedance of 180 ohms?

> You can switch from twinlead to double coax to ladder line to open wire
> line, whatever it takes to get to the antenna.

Does the double coax have to be a certain percentage of a wavelength
before it develops a characteristic impedance? Say I stuck a 10 ft
length of double coax in the middle of 300 ohm ladder-line on 75m.
Would the signal actually see twice the impedance of the coax?

Thanks and 73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:23 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.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: Coax as a balanced feeder?
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 07:27:48 -0500
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: canberra-12.slip.uiuc.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I)

Greg Newberry wrote:

> I want to put up an antenna using balanced feeders but getting them in
> the house isn't an options. Metal roof, metal siding, patio's, etc. A
> few years back I remember an article using 2 equal runs of very low loss
> coax to act as a balanced feed system for an antenna.
>
> What I'd like to know is:
>  Has anyone done this?

Yes, lots of times.

>  What would be the best coax?

Large coax...lowest loss.

>  How would you handle the braid? Tie together at each end and ground the
> transmitter end?

Yes. Both ends if possible.

>  What would be the impedance of something like this?

Twice the impedance of the coax

>  Would the spacing of the coax pair even be an issue?

No issue. Tie them together

> If I used about a 30 ft run I could get it into the clear for connection
> to real ladder line. I know the losses are there, but with a high grade
> of coax and a short run would this have acceptable losses?

You can switch from twinlead to double coax to ladder line to open wire
line, whatever it takes to get to the antenna. In your case you could go
to the outside with double coax and then switch to open wire line. That
would probably be the lowest loss.

Chuck, KE9UW



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:24 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.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: Coax as a balanced feeder?
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 14:58:33 -0500
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kyoto-8.slip.uiuc.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I)

Cecil Moore wrote:
>
> C. J. Hawley wrote:
> > Twice the impedance of the coax
>
> Hi Chuck, just to be sure I understand. Two parallel pieces of 90 ohm
> coax would have a characteristic impedance of 180 ohms?

Umm....I'm trying to figure out how to describe it...parallel makes me
think of "in parallel". I meant side by side feeding the center
conductors with the signal and tying the shield together and then to
ground. The characteristic impedance of that would be 180 ohms.

> > You can switch from twinlead to double coax to ladder line to open wire
> > line, whatever it takes to get to the antenna.
>
> Does the double coax have to be a certain percentage of a wavelength
> before it develops a characteristic impedance? Say I stuck a 10 ft
> length of double coax in the middle of 300 ohm ladder-line on 75m.

What I think here is that it doesn't matter exactly what the
characteristic impedance is as long as the feed line remains balanced
with respect to ground. I guess I think that the characteristic
impedance of a short piece of coax is what it is proposed to be no
matter how short the length....I'm thinking of connectors...they can be
short and be measured to have a characteristic impedance of what they
were designed to have.

> Would the signal actually see twice the impedance of the coax?

The signal would see a feedline of twice the impedance of the coax.

I'm trying to figure out why you are interested in this. I found your
stub tuning interesting but could never figure out what to do with the
dangling lengths of ladderline. It wouldn't do to coil them up....but it
seems like the dual coax could be coiled up.

Chuck, KE9UW



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:25 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-3.sprintlink.net!news1.sunbelt.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jerry Flanders)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax as a balanced feeder?
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 20:15:33 GMT
Organization: Info Avenue INTERNET Access
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <548obl$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ags-r2-p11.groupz.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Greg Newberry) wrote:

>...I want to put up an antenna using balanced feeders but getting them in
>the house isn't an options. Metal roof, metal siding, patio's, etc. A
>few years back I remember an article using 2 equal runs of very low loss
>coax to act as a balanced feed system for an antenna.

>What I'd like to know is:
=================================================
> Has anyone done this?
YES - I HAVE DONE THIS WITH A MULTIBAND DIPOLE WITH ABOUT 120 FEET OF
COAX FOR FEED, FED WITH A MATCHBOX IN THE STATION.

> What would be the best coax?
LOW LOSS. YOU WILL PROBABLY HAVE A HIGH SWR ON SOME BANDS, SO USE
"GOOD" COAX (OR DO AS MOST OF US DO - USE WHATEVER IS AVAILABLE AND
IGNORE THE LOSS).

> How would you handle the braid? Tie together at each end and ground the
>transmitter end?
EXACTLY

> What would be the impedance of something like this?
TWICE THE IMPEDANCE OF EACH LINE. (104 OHMS FOR 52 OHM COAX).

> Would the spacing of the coax pair even be an issue?
NO - BUT KEEP THEM THE SAME LENGTH.
>
>If I used about a 30 ft run I could get it into the clear for connection
>to real ladder line. I know the losses are there, but with a high grade
>of coax and a short run would this have acceptable losses?
I WOULDN'T WORRY ABOUT CHANGING TO LADDER LINE - THAT WILL JUST ADD
ANOTHER DISCONTINUITY IN YOUR FEEDLINE (UNLESS THE IMPEDANCES MATCH,
WHICH IS UNLIKELY).

>I run QRP and don't want to lose very much.
>Thanks
>--
>  Greg Newberry - WB7DUO  QRP-L #760

THIS WOULD BE AN EXCELLENT APPLICATION FOR SURPLUS COMMERCIAL 75 OHM
CABLE TV COAX (THE 3/4 INCH "SOLID" STUFF THEY RUN DOWN THE STREET).
SOMETIMES YOU CAN GET THIS STUFF FREE FROM CABLE TV COMPANIES. THIS
SHOULD BE EXTREMELY LOW-LOSS AT HF.

You can also use equal (electrical) lengths of coax in parallel to
reduce the impedance of a balanced line - two 52s in parallel give a
26, or a 75 and a 52 give a  ...well - I will let you calculate that
one. This is good to know when you need a quarter-wave matching
transformer for some special matching purpose.

JERRY    W4UKU    [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:26 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!news.larc.nasa.gov!night.primate.wisc.edu!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz.cv.hp.com!news
From: Marty Gulseth <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax as a balanced feeder?
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 15:14:21 -0700
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Spokane Division
Lines: 58
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpspkwt.spk.hp.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win16; I)
To: Greg Newberry <[e-mail]>

Greg Newberry wrote:
>

> I want to put up an antenna using balanced feeders but getting them in
> the house isn't an options. Metal roof, metal siding, patio's, etc. A
> few years back I remember an article using 2 equal runs of very low loss
> coax to act as a balanced feed system for an antenna.

Hi Greg,

I *might* still have a copy of the original article. Mid 70's "73 Mag" as I re
call. Let
me know if you are interested. The concept fascinated me also, but I HAVE NOT
tried this
setup (yet.)  By the way, the author also claimed much higher immunity to loca
l noise due
to the coax shielding. YMMV.
>
>  How would you handle the braid? Tie together at each end and ground the
> transmitter end?

As I recall, the author tied the braid together on one end only. Connected the
 tied
together braids to ground at the station (tuner) end.

>  What would be the impedance of something like this?

I struggled with this for a long time, then finally drew a "schematic" of the
compound
line, assuming lumped constants. The two braids are essentially at the same po
tential. If
you want to get really detailed, stick in some minimal "R" to account for ohmi
c losses.
Bottom line - I convinced myself that the impedance really is 2X the character
istic
impedance of the cable.

>  Would the spacing of the coax pair even be an issue?

The author contended that exact same length was more critical than spacing. Se
ems right to
me, as the impedance of the coax is determined by the spacing between center c
onductor and
braid of the coax, plus dielectric properties of the spacer (inner insulation.
) He even
claimed the two could be separated if needed. Given the above, makes sense to
me.

> If I used about a 30 ft run I could get it into the clear for connection
> to real ladder line. I know the losses are there, but with a high grade

Loss is one issue. Matching could be another, but the use of different impedan
ce lines as
in a system is a time-tested technique (or at least used to be) in microwave a
nd RF
circles. End result depends on the antenna in use, and the capability (matchin
g range) of
your tuner.

Two approaches:

1. Get yourself some Smith charts, the Antenna Handbook or equivalent, and hac
k away. If
needed, drive yourself mad figuring out all the possibilities.

2. Put it all together, give it a try, get on the air and have some QSO's! (I
kinda tend
to the latter approach.)

Hope this helps. (I assume) happy hacking. Antennas are fun! 73,

Marty - W7LEJ
Spokane, WA

(std. disclaimers)


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:27 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.cdsnet.net!news.magicnet.net!nntp.newsfirst.com!nntp.crosslink.net!munnari.OZ.AU!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Greg Newberry)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Coax as a balanced feeder?
Date: 18 Oct 96 04:40:53 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Hi,

I apologize in advance if this gets posted twice.

I want to put up an antenna using balanced feeders but getting them in
the house isn't an options. Metal roof, metal siding, patio's, etc. A
few years back I remember an article using 2 equal runs of very low loss
coax to act as a balanced feed system for an antenna.

What I'd like to know is:
 Has anyone done this?
 What would be the best coax?
 How would you handle the braid? Tie together at each end and ground the
transmitter end?
 What would be the impedance of something like this?
 Would the spacing of the coax pair even be an issue?

If I used about a 30 ft run I could get it into the clear for connection
to real ladder line. I know the losses are there, but with a high grade
of coax and a short run would this have acceptable losses? I run QRP and
don't want to lose very much.
Thanks
--
  Greg Newberry - WB7DUO  QRP-L #760
  [e-mail]
  newberrg{dhwtowers/regional/newberrg}@dhw.state.id.us


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:28 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!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: Coax as a balanced feeder?
Date: 19 Oct 1996 06:20:13 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 23
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54aa0t$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

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

>>
>>  How would you handle the braid? Tie together at each end and ground
the
>> transmitter end?
>
>As I recall, the author tied the braid together on one end only.
Connected
>the tied
>together braids to ground at the station (tuner) end.
>
>

The shields MUST  be connected at each end, and should be grounded at
least at the transmitter.

If the shields are not tightly coupled, the shield to shield spacing
becomes part of the conductor spacing and the impedance and loss
increases.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:29 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.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: Coax run lengths
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 15:33:34 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup121-4-5.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 3.0Gold (Win16; I)
To: jonathan Bowes <[e-mail]>

jonathan Bowes wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> I have just purchased a specifically cut Civ/Mil airband antenna. It
> performs very well indeed. It is the model AIR-33 from Haydon Comm in
> London, UK. However, here is Prague I live in a block of flats so the
> antenna is presently sitting in my bedroom on the desk. Obviously not
> the optimal location for it to do its job ! I would like to put it on
> the roof BUT the distance between the scanner and the antenna could be
> between 20-30m. I am wondering about significant signal loss through the
> long coax run. I have higher quality cable. Anyone got any ideas or
> thoughts ??????

I guess you are in 116-133 MHZ band, then 30 M good coax (RG-213 or
better) will not make any harm, it' a matter of parts of db's

SM0BKZ


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:30 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!world1.bellatlantic.net!news2.cais.net!news.cais.net!mr.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!llnews.ll.mit.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (max)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Compumotor Model 2100 Indexer
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 20:06:49 GMT
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <326f90f9.191089936@llnews>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.275

Does anyone have any experience using a  Compumotor Model 2100 Indexer
I am using this to control an antenna probe for taking antenna
patterns in an anechoic chamber.
Thanks,
Max
-------------------------------------
http://members.aol.com/maxfro/private/
--------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:31 1996
From: "Jerry & Susan Moore" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cool Ham Web Page
Newsgroups: alt.ham-radio.packet,att.ham-radio,rec.ham-radio,rec.ham-radio.packet,rec.ham-radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.r
Organization: MJS Enterprises
Message-ID: <01bbba2a$94672100$ae681fce@mjs>
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.31.104.174
Date: 14 Oct 96 23:41:00 GMT
Lines: 7
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.cetlink.net!206.31.104.174
Xref: news1.epix.net alt.ham-radio.packet:135 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29981 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:19657 rec.radio.amateur.dx:1098 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:40684

Visit the Sugar Creek Amateur Radio Societys' (SCARS) Web page

www.perigee.net/~chrisw

--
Jerry Moore / AE4PB..........



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:32 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!news.eunet.fi!jjo
From: [e-mail] (Jari Jokiniemi)
Newsgroups: es.rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: CQ USUARIOS ICOM  706
Date: 15 Oct 1996 12:53:07 GMT
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <53vs4e$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ds10.tekla.fi
In-reply-to: [e-mail]'s message of Tue, 15 Oct 1996 11:20:36 GMT
Xref: news1.epix.net es.rec.radio.amateur:417 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30052 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20222


In article <53vs4e$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jorge) writes:
   Desearia ponerme en contacto con otras estaciones que tengan el equipo
   ICOM 706 para intercambiar impresiones.
   Me gustarφa que me resolvierais algunas dudas, como la potencia que
   realmente os sale en SSB HF, si el VOX funciona correctamente con
   otros micr≤fonos, quΘ micr≤fonos usais ademßs del original de mano,
   decidme si el altavoz interior os vibra o distorsiona un poco cuando
   se sube el volumen, etc. Cualquier comentario al respecto o cualquier
   impresion sobre el IC-706 es bienvenida. Tambien mejoras y
   modificaciones, asφ como experiencias en m≤vil, etc.
   Espero vuestras respuestas, yo estoy a la espera de un software para
   controlar el IC-706 desde un PC, ya os dirΘ algo al respecto. Espero
   noticias.
   Francisco Garcφa  Apartado Correos 123   46080 Valencia

Hola Francisco. Yo no tengo el ICOM 706 pero he hecho un poco de contactos
con uno que mi amigo OH2BYS tiene. El 706 tiene buenas cosas y tambien
malas cosas.

Potencia de salida es sin duda 100 watios si la antenna no tiene
problemas. El 706 es muy pequeno, eso me gusta mucho. Es muy agradable
tener todas las bandas de 1.6 a 30 Mhz y 50 y 144 Mhz en una
radio. Las problemas que tiene estan: 1) los filtros de BLU estan muy
malos, 2) el equipo es un poco dificil de usar, por que tienes que
hacer que quieres "using menus" (perdon, mi castellano no es tan
bueno), 3) si hay grandisimas signales la radio tiene unos problemas.
Creo que el 706 no es para trabajar DX y concursos, pero es ok para
movil y contactos normales. En mi opinion el ICOM 706 es mejor que el
Kenwood TS 50.
--
Jari Jokiniemi, [e-mail], OH2MPO, OH3BU
Tekla Oy, Koronakatu 1, 02210 Espoo, 90-8879 474


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:33 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!inet-prime.comshare.com!news.izzy.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Tim Hynde)
Newsgroups: es.rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: CQ USUARIOS ICOM  706
Date: 16 Oct 1996 12:47:47 GMT
Organization: None
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <542lhj$[e-mail]>
References: <53vs4e$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mlc.izzy.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.11
Xref: news1.epix.net es.rec.radio.amateur:420 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30084 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20265

In article <53vs4e$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>
>Hola estimados amigos y colegas:
>
>Desearia ponerme en contacto con otras estaciones que tengan el equipo
>ICOM 706 para intercambiar impresiones.

Yo tengo varios amigos quien es usan este ICOM-706 y todos estan felizes con
este radio. Por el precio del radio no hay otro con todo lo que tiene.
Cuando yo hable con mis amigos la proxima vez yo les voy a preguntar de la
optiones por otro microfono.

Si yo qiero comprar un radio comercial yo compraria este modela 706, pero
para mi, homebrew es la unica forma HI HI.

Buena suerte, Tim

--Courtesy translation--

>I am looking for other stations using the ICOM 706 to exchange impressions
of the radio.


I have varios friends who are using the ICOM-706 and all of them are happy
with the radio, For the price no other radio has what this one has. When I
talk to my friends the next time I will ask them about the options for
another microphone.

If I wanted to buy a commercial radio I would buy the model 706, but for me
homebrew is the only way. HI HI

Good Luck, Tim



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:35 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!noc.nyx.net!nyx10.cs.du.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (William R. Hester)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Cushcraft AP8
Date: 14 Oct 1996 15:45:07 -0600
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <53uc93$[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb406$279fad00$[e-mail]> <53htr1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: nyx10.nyx.net

Nice response Jerry,  nice to see someone honor and respond in
another person's language.

Gracias,
Bill

--
Bill Hester, Amateur Radio N0LAJ, Denver CO., USA
Please route replies to: [e-mail]
Public Access Unix @ University of Denver, Denver Colorado USA
(no official affiliation with the above university)


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:36 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-in2.uu.net!intac!magsystems!cybernet!roland.stiner
From: [e-mail] (Roland Stiner)
Date: 12 Oct 96 17:35:00
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-FTN-To: [e-mail]
Organization: MAG Systems, Inc/TFP BBS
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Cushcraft AR270 Ringo, any good?                            N
Lines: 12


DN>Has anyone had any experience with the AR270 Ringo that has some other
  >antennas to compare it to? How did it compare?

Compares poorly with a mono band Hygain V4 vertical...  I'm planning on
replacing it one of these days.

---
   OLX 1.53   ...73 DE:  [e-mail]


--


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:37 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-in2.uu.net!news-in.tiac.net!posterchild!n1btq
From: [e-mail] (Tim Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Cushcraft AR270 Ringo, any good?                            N
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 96 10:25:52 GMT
Organization: From the home front
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <53qjgn$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: n1btq.tiac.net
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

>Has anyone had any experience with the AR270 Ringo that has some other
>antennas to compare it to? How did it compare?

Poor...you can do much better off in the homebrew department.  I saw at least
5 used ones for sale at recent hamfests.

73,

Tim


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:37 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!netnews.mis.net!news
From: "Joseph G. Hill" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Cushcraft R5 wanted
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 11:54:50 -0500
Organization: mis.net
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: loukyts12.mis.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b7 (Win95; I)

Looking for Cushcraft R5.


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:38 1996
From: [e-mail] (KT4IJ)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Custom PHOTO QSL cards for $ .30 each!!!!
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 11:32:26 GMT
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.105.162.147
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Lines: 15
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc-e!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!news.paonline.com!news3.paonline.com!206.105.162.147

Hello all Richard KT4IJ here. I am going to try the qsl industry a
bit. I can make and sale custom designed QSL cards for about
30 cents a piece.. They will be printed on photographic paper
<heavy stock> and can have graphics like your call and the
QSL info put on there along with a picture of you in your shack
or your tower or whatever photo you would like to see on the
front of your QSL!! Custom designs avaible. You can even recieve
your proof via e-mail and make sure it is what YOU want before
they are printed!!! Sound good? E-mail [e-mail]
for the info......coming soon a web page with examples to browse
thru'!! Thanks for your intrest....

                                73 frm...Richard KT4IJ




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:40 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!Norway.EU.net!sn.no!usenet
From: prenhall <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Delta Loop 40m
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 16:43:52 -0700
Organization: SN Internett
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: nm3-13.ppp.sn.no
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win16; I)

As the CQWW is coming up, we would like to make a succesful 3 element 40m
Delta Loop. We are contesters, unfortunately not engineers, but as long
as someone are familiar with a subscribtion that works, we should be able
to work you all on 40 the 25+26th of October.

Q: Please give the right measures for reflector, driver and director.
Also the reccomended spacing between director and driver and reflector
and driver. Finally where to feed for best results and how (combination
of 50 and 75 ohms will be prefered as we are reluctant to Gamma Matches).

Anyone ?

LA8SDA
LA4DCA
LA9EEA
LA9SEA : 73 de Erik
--
- prenhall


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:40 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: delta loops
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 96 23:21:02 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53im0e$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1d.delphi.com
X-To: Roy Lewallen <[e-mail]>

I got the delta loop up today and ran some experiments along
with EZNEC. EZNEC indeed does predict too long a loop and
is off by about 300 KHz. My 141ft delta loop is resonant at
7.17MHz. EZNEC sez it is resonant at 7.47MHz. 7.17x141=1011
so the 1005 number is close. 7.47x141=1053 and is, indeed,
too high.

I obviously put the 141ft loop up for 40m, my favorite band.
I ran SWR measurements on the other HF bands and found the
40m loop will work on 20m, 15m, 12m, and 10m with an
antenna tuner. On these bands it has approximately the
same gain and take-off-angle as a half-wave dipole,
according to EZNEC. The SWRs on these bands are around
3-5 so not too much loss in my 9913 feedline. I'm going
to break it half way and use it on 75m.

A very good antenna for 40m and a not bad antenna for
75m, 20m, 15m, 12m, and 10m. If I can figure out how
to balance the currents in balanced line, I will
probably do that so I can use my standard ladder-
line tuning techniques.

73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:43 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-4.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: delta loops
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 11:51:42 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53im0e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <53r398$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.122.62
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

WB3U wrote:
> Hi Cecil, doesn't your standard technique balance the line?
> I thought you were driving the system with a current balun
> placed at a ~50 ohm feedpoint on each band?

Hi Jack, that technique balances the currents at the shack
feedpoint. But feeding a non-symetrical antenna will probably
cause current imbalance to increase from zero at the shack
to something other than zero at the antenna. I do not know
the degree of unbalance in my vertical delta loop. Guess I'll
have to measure it.

> Actually, this brings up another question regarding power
> fed through coax to a "closed" load, such as a loop or a
> resistor.  It was stated in another thread that when we do
> this, a balun isn't necessary.

If it is a horizontal loop, I would agree, because the antenna
is balanced with reference to ground. However, a vertical loop
fed at a side vertex is not balanced with reference to ground
but I do not know the degree of unbalance. Right now, I have a
sleeve choke/balun on the coax at the feedpoint. If I replace
the coax with ladder-line, should I worry about current imbalance?

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


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:44 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: delta loops
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 96 15:50:20 GMT
Organization: Not Enough
Lines: 44
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <53r398$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53im0e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   Cecil Moore <[e-mail]> wrote:

>If I can figure out how
>to balance the currents in balanced line, I will
>probably do that so I can use my standard ladder-
>line tuning techniques.

Hi Cecil, doesn't your standard technique balance the line?
I thought you were driving the system with a current balun
placed at a ~50 ohm feedpoint on each band?

Actually, this brings up another question regarding power
fed through coax to a "closed" load, such as a loop or a
resistor.  It was stated in another thread that when we do
this, a balun isn't necessary.  To paraphrase, because the
currents inside the coax are equal and opposite, and because
all the current from the center conductor flows through the
entire load, all the current from the inner shield must also
flow through the load.  There is no current "left over" to
flow back down the feedline on the outside.

For some reason, I'm having a great deal of trouble with
this concept.  Let's say we have a 50 ohm unshielded resistor
connected to the output of the coax.  The center conductor is
carrying 1 amp, which means 1 amp is flowing through the
resistor.  According to the above theory, 1 amp will also
flow out of the coax from the inner shield, and all of it
*must* flow into the resistor.  It is forced to do so by the
fact that currents inside the coax are forced into balance.
This brings me to the problem.

We know the outer shield is a conductor, and we are
applying a voltage at one end (the load) that creates a
differential across it. How can current *not* flow over
the outer shield under these conditions?  Saying that
there is no current "left over" to flow down the shield
is not sufficient to answer this question.  We are
impressing a difference of potential across a conductor.
Ohms Law states that current must flow.

Any ideas?

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:46 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news1.best.com!newsfeed1.aimnet.com!ns1.aplatform.com!pagesat.net!news.megalinx.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-13.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: delta loops
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 14:28:24 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.122.62
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

Here's another interesting 40m vertical delta loop:

                57ft
+---------------------------+  37ft high
   \                        |
       \                    |
           \                |25.8ft
               \            |
                   \        |
                       \    |
                            +<=== 50 ohms

Between TOAs of 15deg-165deg, this one has almost constant
3dBi gain giving good local coverage as well as DX. Below
25deg TOA it has more gain than a half-wave dipole at the
same height. It is fed with coax eleven feet off the ground
thus minimizing the length of coax.

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


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:47 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: delta loops
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 96 21:57:30 GMT
Organization: Not Enough
Lines: 49
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <53ropp$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53im0e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <53r398$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

       Cecil Moore <[e-mail]> wrote:
   >WB3U wrote:

>> Hi Cecil, doesn't your standard technique balance the line?
>> I thought you were driving the system with a current balun
>> placed at a ~50 ohm feedpoint on each band?

>Hi Jack, that technique balances the currents at the shack
>feedpoint. But feeding a non-symetrical antenna will probably
>cause current imbalance to increase from zero at the shack
>to something other than zero at the antenna. I do not know
>the degree of unbalance in my vertical delta loop. Guess I'll
>have to measure it.

Well, let's think about that for a minute.  If the current
flowing out of the balun is balanced, won't it also be
balanced at the antenna?  Is it possible to have common mode
(imbalance) current where the ladder line connects to the
load, but not where it connects to the balun?  Sorry to pose
more questions, but I'm not at all convinced that the problem
centers around the symmetry of the loop with respect to ground.
Maybe there's something I'm not accounting for, but as long as
the loop is symmetrical to the feedline and doesn't induce a
common mode current, I think the balun will do its job.

Of course, there's one more unknown in all this.  Your method
sometimes places a component in parallel with the line, past
the balun.  Perhaps that component could shunt some of the
current from one side of the line to the other if the antenna
isn't balanced.  That might create common mode current on the
line past that point.

>> Actually, this brings up another question regarding power
>> fed through coax to a "closed" load, such as a loop or a
>> resistor.  It was stated in another thread that when we do
>> this, a balun isn't necessary.

>If it is a horizontal loop, I would agree, because the antenna
>is balanced with reference to ground.

I think maybe I wasn't clear.  If the antenna is symmetrical and
fed with coax, 1/2 the driving voltage will appear on each output
terminal of the coax.  This means 1/2 the driving voltage also
appears on the outside of the shield, at the load.  What prevents
this voltage from creating current flow on the outside of the
coax?  Doesn't Ohms Law require it to do so?

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:49 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.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: delta loops
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 15:22:59 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53im0e$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <53r398$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <53ropp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.122.62
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

WB3U wrote:
> Is it possible to have common mode (imbalance) current where
> the ladder line connects to the load, but not where it connects
> to the balun?

Of course, almost by definition. Common mode currents are the ones
that radiate from the feedline so between ends of the feedline any
power that radiates reduces the common mode currents. CQ magazine
this month has an article on the Zepp antenna. Currents are balanced
at the feedpoint and obviously unbalanced at the point where one of
the feedlines ends abruptly.

> Of course, there's one more unknown in all this.  Your method
> sometimes places a component in parallel with the line, past
> the balun.  Perhaps that component could shunt some of the
> current from one side of the line to the other if the antenna
> isn't balanced.  That might create common mode current on the
> line past that point.

Since common mode currents are, by definition, equal in magnitude
and direction across that component, only differential current
can flow through it as long as it is not referenced to ground.

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


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:50 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.cdsnet.net!news.magicnet.net!nntp.newsfirst.com!nntp.crosslink.net!munnari.OZ.AU!spool.mu.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: delta loops
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 96 05:06:16 GMT
Organization: Not Enough
Lines: 44
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <53shtm$[e-mail]>
References: <53r398$[e-mail]> <53sb14$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

        [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
     >[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>>Actually, this brings up another question regarding power
>>fed through coax to a "closed" load, such as a loop or a
>>resistor.  It was stated in another thread that when we do
>>this, a balun isn't necessary.  To paraphrase, because the
>>currents inside the coax are equal and opposite, and because
>>all the current from the center conductor flows through the
>>entire load, all the current from the inner shield must also
>>flow through the load.  There is no current "left over" to
>>flow back down the feedline on the outside.

>If the load is a small floating resistor, or the load is a
>small ground independent (or a grounded at the shield connection)
>loop antenna, it can be fed with coaxial line with no appreciable
>unbalance.  The common mode impedance of the load is so high,
>very little current can excite the line.

Tom, this is important from the perspective of the overall
picture, but it doesn't really answer the question any better
than "leftover current."  Let me try again.

We use a shielded generator to drive coaxial cable.  At the
far end, the cable is terminated in a 50 ohm unshielded
resistor.  Let's say the RMS voltage at the point where the
shield is connected to the resistor is 100V, measured with
respect to ground.

Now, let's assume the common mode impedance of the outside
of the coax is 200 ohms.  Why won't the 100 volts applied to
the 200 ohm shield create 1/2 amp of RMS common mode current
at that point?  If we impress a voltage across a conductor,
isn't current required to flow?

>The ONLY balun that guarantees balance is a choke balun, because
>it isolates the common mode impedance of the feedpoint and the
>feedline.

Could you define what you mean by a "choke" balun?  All the
broadband baluns I'm familiar with use at least one choke.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:51 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!feed1.news.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] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: delta loops
Date: 14 Oct 1996 09:45:14 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 84
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <53tg5a$[e-mail]>
References: <53shtm$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Jack,

By now we must all know what a choke or current balun is.

In article <53shtm$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>We use a shielded generator to drive coaxial cable.  At the
>far end, the cable is terminated in a 50 ohm unshielded
>resistor.  Let's say the RMS voltage at the point where the
>shield is connected to the resistor is 100V, measured with
>respect to ground.
>
>Now, let's assume the common mode impedance of the outside
>of the coax is 200 ohms.  Why won't the 100 volts applied to
>the 200 ohm shield create 1/2 amp of RMS common mode current
>at that point?

The line would radiate in that case.

But you won't have 100 volts from the shield end of the resistor to ground
unless it's a physically large resistor (in terms of wavelength). You
can't just decide to "make" that voltage 100 volts.

It all goes back to this:

In article <539hke$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
writes:
>Or if we measured the voltage across the balun in this case (this better
>explains what I was trying to do in my earlier example 3):
>
>  - 100v  +  o-a----[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[----b--- 100 ohms --gnd
> ^gnd ---  -  o-c----^  coax balun   ^----d--- 200 ohms --gnd
>
>The voltage from a to b will be 66 2/3 volts with a being more +
>The voltage from c to d will be 66 2/3 volts with c being more +
>
>Current will be equal and opposite, and 333 1/3 milliamperes through a b
c
>or d.
>
>If we measured the current at a and c, and did find it was not equal and
>opposite, the line would radiate. If we measured the current at b and d
>and it was not equal and opposite, the line would radiate. So that is a
>good test of any balun.
>
>(Let's of course assume the common mode impedance of the balun is much
>higher than the load impedance and it is lossless and has no phase
delay.)
>
>Do you agree with this, and the fact if we replaced the line in the balun
>above with parallel wires, or reversed the shield and center at any or
>both ends nothing would change (except phase by 180 degrees in the loads
>if we flipped one end only)?
>
>I think this is a key point to understanding what I am saying, and
>understanding what the balun does and when and why it is needed.

In your resistor description:

You had this:

200 v--------)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))--a--50 ohms----
Ov  (gnd)--^
^--b------------------^

The current at a and b is exactly equal and opposite, so the line does not
radiate. Point B is grounded, by the outside of the shield, and has zero
volts with respect to ground. The common mode impedance of the load is
infinite, so the shield can move freely to zero volts with respect to
ground but the difference from a to b remains 200 volts.

One way to force b to 100 volts would be to use a center tapped resistance
of two twenty-five ohm resistors across a and b, and the connect the
center tap to a large electrical mass with very low impedance. b would
only go to 100 volts if the common mode line impedance was infinite. If it
wasn't infinite, b would go to some voltage less than 100 volts, the load
would see less than 200 volts from end to end, the current would be
unequal at a and b, and the line would radiate.

A physically large antenna (in terms of the wavelength) looks like the
tapped resistance.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:53 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: delta loops
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 96 02:55:30 GMT
Organization: Not Enough
Lines: 89
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <53uukp$[e-mail]>
References: <53shtm$[e-mail]> <53tg5a$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

      [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:

>   Hi Jack,
>
>By now we must all know what a choke or current balun is.

Well, that's somewhat like saying we know what a tree is.
Just as we can't tap a pine tree and get maple syrup, neither
can we expect identical results from different types of
baluns.   Classifying a particular group as "current baluns"
merely describes the expected results when they're properly
applied.  It's a label of convenience, but it's nearly
useless in analyzing their internal workings.  On the other
hand, classifying them as choke baluns isn't even particularly
convenient, because every broadband balun I've ever seen
(including voltage baluns) used at least one choke in its
internal structure.

This is one of the problems when you refer to a "choke balun"
in your posts.  That term means nothing to me.  It might refer
to ferrite beads slipped over the end of a length of coax, or
it could be a bifilar winding on a ferrite rod, to name just
two common types.  The internal workings of these devices are
not the same except in a general sense.  Their performance in
the face of abnormal loads can vary considerably.

   >[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>>We use a shielded generator to drive coaxial cable.  At the
>>far end, the cable is terminated in a 50 ohm unshielded
>>resistor.  Let's say the RMS voltage at the point where the
>>shield is connected to the resistor is 100V, measured with
>>respect to ground.
>>
>>Now, let's assume the common mode impedance of the outside
>>of the coax is 200 ohms.  Why won't the 100 volts applied to
>>the 200 ohm shield create 1/2 amp of RMS common mode current
>>at that point?

>The line would radiate in that case.

     <snip>

>In your resistor description:
>
>You had this:
>
>200 v--------)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))--a--50ohms----
>  Ov  (gnd)--^                             ^--b-----------^
>
>The current at a and b is exactly equal and opposite, so the
>line does not radiate.
>
>Point B is grounded, by the outside of the shield, and has
>zero volts with respect to ground. The common mode impedance
>of the load is infinite, so the shield can move freely to zero
>volts with respect to ground but the difference from a to b
>remains 200 volts.

OK, I know exactly what you mean.  It's similar to an audio
output circuit with a transformer driving a speaker.  In theory,
if there is no common mode path back to the amplifier ground, a
speaker lead can assume virtually any voltage with respect to
ground.  However, as soon as a path is created (including even
the miniscule path through a scope probe), the voltage on that
speaker terminal will drop to zero because it will float to the
ground reference.

Many thanks for your explanation.  Somewhere in these long
discussions about coax, ladder line, baluns and all the rest,
I lost sight of this concept.  Too many trees, not enough
forest.  ;)  I appreciate you going over it again.

A few last questions on this topic.  Do you think the resistor
in the example above will have zero volts RF on the shield leg
whenever the common mode impedance of the shield is not infinite?
In other words, any conductivity to ground at all will cause the
voltage to float to ground potential?  I realize there's no way
to measure this, I'm just wondering if you would generally agree
with this statement?  Also, it seems to me that if no current
whatsoever flows down the outside of the feedline, that can only
mean that the voltage at the shield end of the resistor is at
absoute zero with respect to ground.  Again, this is theoretical.
I'm just wondering if you generally agree.

Thanks again for your explanation.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:55 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: delta loops
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 96 00:34:46 GMT
Organization: Not Enough
Lines: 73
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <541ap5$[e-mail]>
References: <53uukp$[e-mail]> <5404pc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

       [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
    >[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>>This is one of the problems when you refer to a "choke balun"
>>in your posts.  That term means nothing to me.  It might refer
>>to ferrite beads slipped over the end of a length of coax, or
>>it could be a bifilar winding on a ferrite rod, to name just
>>two common types.  The internal workings of these devices are
>>not the same except in a general sense.

>The outside world doesn't care about the internal workings.

It would have been much more helpful if you had addressed the
problem I pointed out, namely the confusion your terminology
causes whenever this subject comes up.  Again, no one can
possibly know which type of device you're referring to when
you merely use the term "choke balun".  Regarding the inner
workings, I tried substituting a Brillo pad for a balun.  The
outside world *did* know the difference.  ;)

>>Their performance in
>>the face of abnormal loads can vary considerably.

>Not at all. They behave exactly the same.

This is very confusing.  Earlier, you said that one particular
type of choke balun won't lose power if the common mode
impedance rises.  Now you're saying they all act the same.

>That is an important point, and my biggest worry during the
>other balun thread. I was afraid some of us would loose sight
>of the operation of a choke balun.

I haven't lost sight.  I'm just trying to figure out which type
of balun you're referring to, and why you won't tell me.  ;)

>>>In your resistor description:
>>>
>>>You had this:
>>>
>>>200 v--------)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))--a--50ohms----
>>>  Ov  (gnd)--^                             ^--b-----------^
>>>
>
>>Many thanks for your explanation.  Somewhere in these long
>>discussions about coax, ladder line, baluns and all the rest,
>>I lost sight of this concept.  Too many trees, not enough
>>forest.  ;)  I appreciate you going over it again.
>>
>>A few last questions on this topic.  Do you think the resistor
>>in the example above will have zero volts RF on the shield leg
>>whenever the common mode impedance of the shield is not infinite?
>>In other words, any conductivity to ground at all will cause the
>>voltage to float to ground potential?

>I take it you mean when the shield impedance IS infinite. In that
>case, it doesn't matter. The common mode imnpedance is so high NO
>current would flow, and the current at a and be would be equal and
>opposite. The line would not radiate.

No that's not what I was asking.  I don't know how to rephrase
the question, so I'll have to ask you to look at it again.

>Somewhere in between is the case where maximum power would be
>radiated (if we define the common mode impedance of the resistor).
>Guess where.

Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean.  Are you referring to
radiation from the feedline, based on a variable common mode
impedance for both the load and the line itself?

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:57 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!feed1.news.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] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: delta loops
Date: 15 Oct 1996 09:49:32 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 50
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <5404pc$[e-mail]>
References: <53uukp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Jack,

In article <53uukp$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>
>This is one of the problems when you refer to a "choke balun"
>in your posts.  That term means nothing to me.  It might refer
>to ferrite beads slipped over the end of a length of coax, or
>it could be a bifilar winding on a ferrite rod, to name just
>two common types.  The internal workings of these devices are
>not the same except in a general sense.

The outside world doesn't care about the internal workings.

>Their performance in
>the face of abnormal loads can vary considerably.

Not at all. They behave exactly the same.  That is an important point, and
my biggest worry during the other balun thread. I was afraid some of us
would loose sight of the operation of a choke balun.

>>In your resistor description:
>>
>>You had this:
>>
>>200 v--------)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))--a--50ohms----
>>  Ov  (gnd)--^                             ^--b-----------^
>>

>Many thanks for your explanation.  Somewhere in these long
>discussions about coax, ladder line, baluns and all the rest,
>I lost sight of this concept.  Too many trees, not enough
>forest.  ;)  I appreciate you going over it again.
>
>A few last questions on this topic.  Do you think the resistor
>in the example above will have zero volts RF on the shield leg
>whenever the common mode impedance of the shield is not infinite?
>In other words, any conductivity to ground at all will cause the
>voltage to float to ground potential?

I take it you mean when the shield impedance IS infinite. In that case, it
doesn't matter. The common mode imnpedance is so high NO current would
flow, and the current at a and be would be equal and opposite. The line
would not radiate.

Somewhere in between is the case where maximum power would be radiated (if
we define the common mode impedance of the resistor). Guess where.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:58 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!feed1.news.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] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: delta loops
Date: 15 Oct 1996 09:49:57 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 38
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <5404q5$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Jesse,

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (W6KKT
Jesse) writes:

>Tom, are you really suggesting , Jack's clear, concise , and accurate
>explanation concerning differential and common mode currents when
>using coax line, was the "syndrome" that launched the above "balun
>isn't necessary  when feeding  a large loop with coax " statement?

Not Jack's statement in paticular, but rather that general concept is
exactly what I am suggesting. It is pretty evident that although the
statements are clear and concise, the conclusions or mental pictures they
form are a bit hazy.

>Why are you not "afraid" someone may misinterpret the "the current
>slices thru the shield like butter" theory?

If they did use that anaolgy, we might often be better off. Some of us
would be less likely to mis-apply the model. In most cases in the world,
the end effect we see appears to us as direct radiation from or "through"
the shield.

If currents are not exactly equal and opposite at the shield and center
conductor source or termination, or if currents in a balanced line are not
exactly equal and opposite, ANY line will radiate. It's that simple. Why
overcomplicate it?

So if the loop because of it's large electrical mass, provides a stiff
voltage from each terminal to ground, and if the transmission line has a
different impedance from each terminal to ground at the antenna, currents
in the line will become unbalanced and the line will radiate.

It's the common mode impedance of the antenna, and the line, that
determines feedline radiation. Let's forget about inside out current and
knives cutting through butter stuff for now, and look at the system.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:58 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!munnari.OZ.AU!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Mark K Flanagan)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re:Discone Antenna
Date: 13 Oct 96 14:16:21 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Jason,

The antenna is a fine choice if you also plan on monitoring other bands
as well.
If you only want an antenna for 2m local repeaters you can build a ground
plane
very cheap or buy one from MFJ for less than $15.  You won't need a yagi
unless
you are in a hole or want to work fringe repeaters with less than 5
watts.  2m is
quite forgiving if you can get the antenna outside and at least at
rooftop height.


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:00:59 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-8.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!news.zocalo.net!news.zeitgeist.net!news.greatbasin.net!usenet
From: Dick Flanagan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: Discontinued Alinco Radios - 600 Lot Below Cost!!
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 08:19:36 -0700
Organization: Libelle Productions, Inc., Minden, Nevada USA
Lines: 7
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)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30089 rec.radio.swap:91507

Customer Service wrote:
>
> Each unit will have one line etched through the serial number.

Thanks, but no thanks!
--
Dick Flanagan W6OLD CFII ([e-mail]) Minden, Nevada


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:01 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news-out.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!feed1.news.erols.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!shore.net!mv!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Customer Service)
Subject: Discontinued Alinco Radios - 600 Lot Below Cost!!
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Connectors Unlimited
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 14:12:24 GMT
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: connect.mv.com
Lines: 28

Are you interested?

We have access to 600 Alinco Radios - older discontinued models. All
are new and in working order. Some may not have the original box.
There is a mix of 144mhz Handheld, 440mhz Handheld, 144mhz mobile,
and 144/440mhz mobile. A complete inventory list will be available
shortly. These units are NOT covered by a manufacturer warranty. Each
unit will have one line etched through the serial number. Asking
price for the lot is US$60,000.00

If you would like further information please inquire directly. Time
is of the essence. The inventory must be liquidated by the first week
of November.
--
Customer Service
Connectors Unlimited
P O Box 5973
Manchester, NH 03108-5973

Mailto:[e-mail] (Technical Support)
Mailto:[e-mail] (Orders only)
http://hightec.com/connectors/

[phone] fax
[phone]

"We'll keep you well connected"



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:02 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!super.zippo.com!zdc-e!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!psinntp!psinntp!news.rl.af.mil!rl.af.mil!robinsona
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Discontinued Alinco Radios - 600 Lot Below Cost!!
Date: 17 Oct 1996 16:45:01 GMT
Organization: USAF Rome Laboratory
Lines: 28
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <545nqd$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ce7.ce.rl.af.mil

In message <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Customer Service)
writes:

>Are you interested?
>
>We have access to 600 Alinco Radios - older discontinued models. All
>are new and in working order. Some may not have the original box.
>There is a mix of 144mhz Handheld, 440mhz Handheld, 144mhz mobile,
>and 144/440mhz mobile. A complete inventory list will be available
>shortly. These units are NOT covered by a manufacturer warranty. Each
>unit will have one line etched through the serial number. Asking
>price for the lot is US$60,000.00
>
>If you would like further information please inquire directly. Time
>is of the essence. The inventory must be liquidated by the first week
>of November.
>--
>Customer Service
>Connectors Unlimited
>P O Box 5973
>Manchester, NH 03108-5973
>
>"We'll keep you well connected"
>

And I suppose that along with the radios, the buyer gets some land in Florida
and a bridge in Brooklyn?



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:03 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!spstimes.sps.mot.com!newsdist.sps.mot.com!newsgate.sps.mot.com!usenet
From: Jim <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: Discontinued Alinco Radios - 600 Lot Below Cost!!
Date: 18 Oct 1996 14:59:57 GMT
Organization: IdeaSource
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <54861d$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 222.229.249.54
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.12(Macintosh; I; PPC)
X-URL: news://newsgate/[e-mail]
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30118 rec.radio.swap:91606

Dick Flanagan <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Customer Service wrote:
>>
>> Each unit will have one line etched through the serial number.
>
>Thanks, but no thanks!


Why not?  It works out to $100 per radio, and you get exactly the same
warranty/guarantee as if you bought it in the tailgate area.

I expect we'll start seeing these rigs popping up at swapfests a few
weeks after the lot is sold, for twice the original asking price.

N6OTQ




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:04 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!cs.utexas.edu!wotan.compaq.com!twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com!news
From: Monty Wilson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Do antenna makers lie about their stats?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (System Administrator)
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: very little
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 13:29:34 GMT
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: monty.pc.hou.compaq.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 22

I would like to shop for beam, quad, LP
(or combinations thereof) and I wonder how confident I
can be in the forward gain, f/b and f/s numbers given
by the manufacturer's ad material.  Do any of you fans of
antenna modeling software have any experience taking the
dimensions of commercially available antennas, modeling
them, and comparing the results to the numbers claimed
by the manufacturers?

I'll check Deja News for posts you guys may have made on
the major manufacturers.

Boo hoo, I have to wait an extra year for Dayton because
Hamvention '97 falls on my wife's graduation day.  :-(

Thanks and 73

--
.........Monty.
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:05 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!news00.sunet.se!sunic!mn5.swip.net!news
From: Maude Schyffert <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Do antenna makers lie about their stats?
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 08:52:26 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup121-6-16.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 3.0Gold (Win16; I)
To: Monty Wilson <[e-mail]>

Monty Wilson wrote:
>
> I would like to shop for beam, quad, LP
> (or combinations thereof) and I wonder how confident I
> can be in the forward gain, f/b and f/s numbers given
> by the manufacturer's ad material.

Well not lie but maybee don't tell all, e.g. what the numbers refers to,
dipole or isotropic antenna.

SM0BKZ


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:06 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!oronet!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jim Weir)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Do antenna makers lie about their stats?
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 15:40:54 GMT
Organization: RST Engineering
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <540bbf$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: rst-engr.oro.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Monty Wilson <[e-mail]> shared these priceless pearls of
wisdom:

 comparing the results to the numbers claimed
->by the manufacturers?

No, most of us do the design and then put the antenna in the best possible
mounting configuration -- generally on the same pattern range we use for
FCC type acceptance testing, since we've tested the range to a
fair-thee-well for the approval from the Feds.

Most reputable manufacturers will give you the data that they took on that
range and what the reference was -- dbi (db referenced to isotropic) or dbd
(db referenced to a standard dipole).

And, don't forget that the pattern range is some small distance compared to
normal transmitting distances.  Three meters and thirty meters are the
standards.  When you get to using an HF antenna at 3000 km, things change a
bit.

Oh, your antenna modeling software is a good first cut, but the proof of
the pudding is in the tasting.  Measurement is the only decent way to post
meaningful numbers.  Just because your computer model and the measurements
vary by a significant fraction is no reason to say that the manufacturer is
cheating.

And then there was the EE-PhD (with zero practical experience) who bought
one of our VHF antennas and bitched and bitched on the phone about how
lousy a results he was getting when we had such great measurement numbers.
Come to find out he was using it inside the sub-sub-basement of a
steel-frame building and trying to use it to send data cross-town simplex.
Sigh.

Having said all this stuff, take a look at the new RST-8710 VHF vertical
dipole antenna at www.rst-engr.com   For $13, it is one of the better
things I've designed in my life.  (Give the website until this weekend to
get all the data up -- we just released it to production yesterday).

Jim

Jim Weir VP Engineering | You bet your sweet patootie I speak for the
RST Engineering         | company.  If I don't, ain't nobody gonna.
Grass Valley CA 95945   |
http://www.rst-engr.com | AR Adv WB6BHI--FCC 1st phone---Cessna 182A N73CQ
[e-mail]        | Commercial/CFI-Airplane/Glider-A&P-FAA Counselor



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:07 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-in2.uu.net!news.magicnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!ratty.wolfe.net!usenet
From: Ramon Gandia <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Do antenna makers lie about their stats?
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 02:22:50 -0800
Organization: Anvil Technology
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <540bbf$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: nome-ts1-p01.nome.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Design, construction, manufacture, adjustment, etc is done by the
engineering department.  Antenna specs, specially gain figures,
are put out by the advertising department.

--
In order to foil SpamBots, my e-mail address is not
machine readable.  Please reply to address below:

Ramon Gandia,    Nome, Alaska  |    rfg.at.nome.dot.net
AL7X          S/V Seven Stars  |
907-443-2437 fax [phone]  | where at=@  dot=period


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:07 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.corpcomm.net!news.gate.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Don Stoner)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Dr. Yagi
Date: 17 Oct 1996 20:30:04 GMT
Organization: CyberGate, Inc.
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <54650c$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: stpfl1-53.gate.net
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.6

Does anyone know the first name of Yagi and who was (or is) Uda (Yagi-Uda)?



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:08 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!boulder!usenet
From: Bob Tomas <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: experience w/ top loading butternut verticals?
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 12:57:57 -0600
Organization: Program in Atmospheric & Oceanic Sciences, CU Boulder
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: paos2.colorado.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4m)

I am thinking of installing some top loading wires ontop of
my butternut vertical and am interested in hearing from others
who might have experience with this.  What sort of performance
changes were noted on 160m and 80m?  Was 40m effected? Detrimentally?

Bob Tomas
N7ND


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:09 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.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] (SJ Beyers)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: EZNEC wire loss
Date: 19 Oct 1996 05:43:13 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 9
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54a7rh$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

The user-defined wire loss input for EZNEC calls for resistivity and
relative permeability.  What should I use for ordinary mild steel?  I
found some info in the Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, but I'm not sure
of either the definitions or the
units.

                                                  Thanks

                                                  Steve W9HJW


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:10 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newspump.sol.net!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!ix.netcom.com!news
From: Mark Fossum <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Fax or e-mail address Gap Antenna Products
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 08:39:44 -0500
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: tfx-us3-27.ix.netcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-NETCOM-Date: Mon Oct 14  8:41:25 AM CDT 1996
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
To: [e-mail]

Bart Mudde wrote:
>
> Hello OM,
> Because I have problems with my Gap Titan DX I want some advise of the
> factory. Therefore I wrote a letter three weeks ago, but I didn't get
> any reaction. There fore I am looking for the e-mail address or the fax
> number of that factory. Who can help me ?
> 73 de Bart PA3GGM.


Try  [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:11 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!news00.sunet.se!sunic!mn5.swip.net!news
From: Maude Schyffert <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: FM antenna question
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 08:47:04 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbba42$71cba540$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup121-6-16.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 3.0Gold (Win16; I)
To: bob <[e-mail]>

bob wrote:
>
> a new station has begun broadcasting near me on 88.5
> my favorite station is on 88.7, but is much further away.
> i believe the bearings are about 30 degrees different (from
> where i live).
>
> what would be my best antenna choice?

A yagi would be OK, maybee quite a good one to get better sidelobe
cancellation, and then an attenuator.

SM0BKZ


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:12 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!news.tamu.edu!news.utdallas.edu!news.starnet.net!thepit.trucom.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Marty Albert)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Fox Hunt!
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 05:58:41 GMT
Organization: TruCom Internet Services
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <53nciv$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup4.trucom.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:116327 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29876

Hello, Folks:

On October 13, 1996 the Eastern Ozarks Amateur Radio Club (EOARC) will
sponsor a Fox Hunt in St. Francois County Missouri.

Sign up will be from 1300-1330 at the Mineral Area College parking lot
in Park Hills (formerly Flat River) and the Hunt itself will start at
1400.

Entry is _FREE_ but you must register!!

Maps of St. Francois County will be provided.

The Fox will live on 2m FM simplex and the exact frequency will be
announced by the Fox at 1400. The Fox will be somewhere in St.
Francois County.

Certificates and ribbons will be awarded.

From St. Louis, take Interstate 55 south to US highway 67 south to the
Leadington/Park Hills exit then turn left.

From Cape Girardeau, take Interstate 55 north to US Highway 67 south
as above.

From Poplar Bluff, take US Highway 67 north to exit as above and turn
right.

You may call on the EOARC repeater on 147.030 (+600) for talk-in.

All Amateurs are welcome and encouraged to attend!

Take Care & 73



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

Heartland Internet Services

*****************************************************
If you're making too much money, don't go here!
http://www.adgrafix.com/info/calbertjr/sales.html
*****************************************************



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:13 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!nntp.crl.com!acara.snsnet.net!news.scott.net!usenet
From: Bill Levey <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Free Web Classifieds
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 10:20:16 -0500
Organization: BRO dot NET Internet Marketing
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup35.scott.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Free Amateur Radio web classified advertising is available at:

http://bro.net/forsale.html

73!


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:13 1996
From: [e-mail] (Dr. Gar Won Ko)
Subject: FS: Complete Ham Shack
Date: 13 Oct 96 01:18:38 -0700
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-ana-7.sprintlink.net!news.msn.com!msn.com
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Organization: The Microsoft Network (msn.com)
Lines: 8

Cushcraft A4S, Quad-Band Beam, 40 Ft. of Rohn 25G Tower, Cushcraft
11-element 2-meter beam, mast, Ham IV Rotor. All FOR SALE in Wichita,
Kansas. You take down. I have listing available to attach to a reply
message.

Dr. Gar Won Ko
N(zero)EQS
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:14 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!lebanet!usenet
From: Ben Tersian <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: FS: Tubes, amps and coax.
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 15:20:25 -0400
Organization: LebaNet
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ura.moron.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30102 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:19688 rec.radio.amateur.dx:1115 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:40820 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20277

Rockwell Collins Intl. HF-8030 New power supply for 8020 series amp. New
in box outstanding at 1500$

6EA8 JAN New in box, $2.00

12AT7 New in box, $3.00 each

RG389 7/8 Inch hardline 50Ohm Super low gloss 40ft length with 2/6ft
pigtails 50.00 Brand New.

JAN 832A New in box $10.00 each


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:15 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news-m01.ny.us.ibm.net!newsfeed.uk.ibm.net!tomb.env.cz!CEU!JBOWES
From: JBOWES@CEU (JBOWES)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: FTP anonymous sites for antenna designs ???
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 13:38:31
Organization: CZECH ECOLOGICAL INSTITUTE, PRAHA
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <JBOWES.2.000DA4C3@CEU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.168.12.59

Dear all,

I have a 2 good books on Antenna designs but neither cover the topic of
mobile antennas very well at all. I just made a simple mag mount antenna for
mid band operation of 2m and MIR monitoring, however, I would like to try a
10m mobile whip and some 5/8 mobile whips for air band (118-136 Mhz)
monitoring. I'd be well greatful if anyone has any reference to any ftp
sites or any web pages relevant here. I'm too short on money to buy more
books and anyway english amateur books here are very rare.

Thanks for you time readers.



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:16 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.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]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Fwd: Tower Safety
Date: 17 Oct 96 21:10:21 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=
---------------------
Forwarded message:
From:   [e-mail] (Cronise, Richard D)
Sender: [e-mail]
Reply-to:       [e-mail] (Cronise, Richard D)
To:     [e-mail] ('ham-tech')
Date: 96-10-16 11:39:34 EDT


In light of the recent Texas tragedy, where a 1500-foot commercial
transmission tower collapsed with the loss of three lives, perhaps this
subject should be reviewed by tower climbers.  Few details made the
Associated Press story, other than the gin was grabbed by a gust of wind,
and in its fall took out a guy wire, thus causing the collapse.  Does anyone
have further details of the occurence that can be shared, in the hopes of
learning some safety lessons?  I realize that this (1500 feet) is an extreme
height from a ham tower perspective, but I'm sure the safety principles
still apply.  Although I have never climbed a tower, I'm sure I will have
the opportunity (or necessity) to do so in the future; I'm also sure many
others will be in the same situation.  Anyone care to help?  Thanks.

Rich N2MXJ
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:17 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!news.PBI.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Fwd: Tower Safety
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 23:28:06 -0800
Organization: A customer of Pacific Bell Internet Services
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-206-170-1-135.snfc21.pacbell.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-PBXE  (Win16; I)

Thomas W. Castle wrote:
>
> A good tower workers motto is: ""NO JOB IS SO IMPORTANT, THAT WE CANNOT
> TAKE THE TIME To DO it SAFELY...""  This motto is similar to Ole Maw Bells,
> where we first took our first climbing instructions in 1967.... Thats
> how you might get to be an old tower worker, if your lucky...
>
> De Tom.

Tom-

        Thank you very much for your professional's eye-view.  I have occasion
to work with tower workers (FM-BC) and admire what they do and the much care
that is taken for safety reasons.  "Amateur" tower and pole climbers should ta
ke
even more care for personal safety.

        73,

        -=Tony=-        W6ANV   San Francisco, CA


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:18 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!newspump.sol.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!cv752
From: [e-mail] (Kim Krueger)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: glass mount anrenna 2 meter/ 70cm
Date: 18 Oct 1996 17:14:20 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 14
Sender: [e-mail] (Kim Krueger)
Message-ID: <548dtc$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Kim Krueger)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca


I would like to know if anyone has a 97 Honda Accord EXR with the AM/FM
in the rear window? I would like to buy one but am unable to find out what
effect the 2m/70cm radio will have on the AM/FM radio and also if there
would be any RFI problems with the onboard computers etc.
I approached Honda Canada and there reply was that they only test Honda
products in there cars and are therefore unable to comment on the effect.
I am driving a 92 EXR with the glass mount a GMA 270 by glassmaster no
problems.
--
Kim Krueger
VA3VKK
[e-mail]
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:19 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!li.net!bbruhns
From: [e-mail] (Bob Bruhns)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Glenayre Wireless Telephone (digital UHF 455.375)   Help !
Date: 17 Oct 1996 14:37:50 GMT
Organization: LI Net (Long Island Network)
Lines: 49
Message-ID: <545gbu$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: linet01.li.net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

To get much more antenna gain, I think you should consider a parabolic
dish, although this could get pretty big at 450 MHz.  Check with
Andrews.  But, I think there might be legal problems with higher
antenna gain; even 14 dB at 5 watts out might be too high to be legal
in some countries.  Of course, there's nothing that says you can't
have unlimited gain on the receive antenna.

I think Andrews and Celwave make bidirectional amplifiers that might be
suitable for passive repeater use, but consider the possibility of
overloading caused by stronger and / or closer stations.  If these
overload the repeater amplifier, it will desense and you will be worse
off than you were.

I don't know how wide the front ends of these SS radios are.  You
might find you're desensing from a discrete signal far from your
bandwidth, and a notch or bandpass cavity could solve your problem.

The -100 dB RX sensitivity spec at 450 MHz tells me these are the new
spread spectrum units.  I saw a -98 dBm RX sensitivity spec in the
0.8 watt Cylink 900 MHz SS units I tested.  I think they could get
higher sensitivity with longer PN generator polynomials, but
telecommunications laws forbid that, probably for security reasons.

  Bob Bruhns, WA3WDR, [e-mail]





Roy & Christina Hines ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Problem:
: Need high gain antennas for a 5 watt Glenayre Wile System RU-EU
: UHF 440-480 Mhz digital synthesized telephone system)
: Base (EU to mountain 8.5 miles, mountain to RU 4 miles)
: 5 watts RU output = +37 db
: 1st antenna set stacked 11 db yagi total +14 db
: 2nd set antenna set stacked 11 db yagi total +14 db
: RU signal received -80 to -100 db
: -80 to -100 would be OK if not for sharp 20db drops outs for 200 ms
: What I need is a stronger antenna system for that range (if exists)
: Also is a passvie repeater a possble solution
:      (ei: back to back yagis on mountain)

: I would appreciate any suggestions

: Sincerly:
: Roy A Hines
: Cherry Creek Elctric
: Port Alberni, BC


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:20 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!uwm.edu!homer.alpha.net!usenet
From: "Andrew R. Gozdziewski" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.swap,rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.cb
Subject: GMR100 Speaker/Microphone
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 19:35:13 -0600
Organization: Alpha.net -- Milwaukee, WI
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: 156.46.121.215
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Macintosh; U; 68K)
Xref: news1.epix.net alt.radio.scanner:40339 rec.radio.scanner:68285 rec.radio.shortwave:86656 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29958 rec.radio.amateur.dx:1094 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:40657 rec.radio.amateur.misc:116422 rec.radio.cb:36426

Does anyone have a Uniden Speaker/Mic they would like to sell?  Has
anyone had any experience with one or have an more information about it
(PTT or voice-activated?)?

Thanks in advance!

Andrew


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:21 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.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] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re:Goodbye
Date: 11 Oct 1996 08:03:33 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 4
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <53ld2l$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Ken, I agree. A vast majority of the comments you received were in
extraordinarily bad taste. No reason for it. Best of luck!

Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:22 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!ionews.ionet.net!wilbur.ohww.norman.ok.us!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!news.postech.ac.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!newsfeed.dacom.co.kr!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!hole.news.pipex.net!pipex!bt!btnet-feed2!news.compulink.co.uk!cix.compulink.co.uk!usenet
From: [e-mail] ("Stephen Walters")
Subject: Re: Goodbye.
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Compulink Information eXchange
References: <53ji51$[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 21:34:44 GMT
X-News-Software: Ameol32
Lines: 1

This is a very long goodbye!


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:23 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.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: Re: Goodbye.
Date: 12 Oct 1996 18:39:21 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 11
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <53p6mp$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I think some of you guys are gruesomely cruel! NO ONE 'gets what they
deserve' in an accident.

Why don't you ('some of you guys') go watch 'Our Town' instead of Baywatch
and maybe you'll realize life is too precious to piss around with, and
CERTAINLY so fleeting that anyone who gets the short end AT LEAST dserves
a little understanding!

Hope you are making progress Ken.

Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:24 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!insync!news.ios.com!usenet
From: Larry Deering <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Goodbye.
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 11:15:14 -0700
Organization: Internet Online Services
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-6.ts-1.suf.idt.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; I)
To: Ken Bessler <[e-mail]>
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29905 rec.radio.swap:91002 rec.radio.cb:36387

Ken Bessler wrote:
> I'll put all my equipment in the closet for 1 year.
> If I don't want it after then I will throw it away. I would not want to
> donate it to a school just to see some kid end up like me or worse. I don't
> care what you think. I don't subscribe to these newsgroups anymore so any
> further threats, sick humor, bad mouthing etc. will have to be CC'ed to my
> e-mail address for me to see them.
>
> Thanks to those who have supported me (especially KB0PWD, my wife who has
> been through hell over the last 10 days.)
>

Ken,
        I'm sorry about your accident. I think you are blaming the wrong
crowd. If you are going to put anything away in the closet, why not the
computer? In fact, why not just the modem? It seems to me that the jerks that
came out of the woodwork are 'netizens'. Really now, has any ham on the air
made any awful remarks to you, or it just the ones here on the net?
        Your treatment here in rec.radio.* is living proof that lower entry
requirements and digital modes result in crude and rude communication. I
suggest that more time on the air, and less time on the net would be
beneficial.

73 es GL,
Larry, wa2yte



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:25 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsgate.compuserve.com!newsmaster
From: Bob Needleman <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Goodbye.
Date: 13 Oct 1996 03:50:37 GMT
Organization: CompuServe Incorporated
Lines: 68
Message-ID: <53poud$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53f5k4$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hd20-225.compuserve.com
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29910 rec.radio.swap:91010 rec.radio.cb:36390

Carl Black <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> William E. Sabin wrote:
> >
> > >I have worked on towers (at 1500 feet) for over 15
> > > years...some minor scratches but (so far) nothing serious.
> > > your life (twice) by giving up something you love in addition to
> > > everything else you have already lost......KN6UG
> >
> > If you were to fall from one of your 1500 foot towers, wouldn't you
> > get discouraged and give up tower climbing, ham radio, etc?
> >
> > Bill W0IYH
>
> Surely you jest.....
>
> While the original story of the fellow falling 1.5 stories was tragic,
> being "discouraged" by falling from a 1500 ft. tower? Really!!! :-)
> I think that after such an event discouragement and all other such
> concerns would end rather quickly.
>
> And, I don't really mean to make light of the misfortune described in
> the original posting.  I wish that fellow well and hope that in time he
> reconsiders giving up the hobby.
>
> Carl, W3KI

Interesting you should use the 1500 ft tower example. Just heard on
news that a 1500 ft. broadcast ant. snapped while being worked on.
Apparently a guy wire snapped and killed several of the people working
on it. As you said - from that type of height, every move can be life
threatening. That's why broadcast tower climbers are VERY careful about every
move they make and plan out well in advance exactly what they're going
to be doing in advance. Nothing is left to chance, including back up
safety harnesses,taking up everything they'll need to avoid unnecessary
trips back down, etc.They often will stay up there several hours, from
sunup to sundown, so they make sure they do the job right first time
out.  That's difference between us amateurs and the
pro's. If I had a tower, and was inexperienced in climbing, or did it
infrequently, I'd pay a pro to do the job for me. Better to cost a few
hundred bucks and have it done right, than saving that money and possible
suffering permanent injury or death. It's nice to say on the air that
"yep, just ran up the tower and fixed the beam", but not if it may
cost you your life. Ham radio isn't worth losing you life for or being
permanently injured. I am sorry to hear about that tragic accident,
and I hope that it was not "operator error", but accidents do happen and
it would be a shame to blame it on the hobby. It's like amateur pilots who sur
vive
 a plane crash - they usually will fly again, although it takes them awhile
to get up the courage. Whatever the injured person decides, I wish him
 a speedy recovery and best of luck with whatever he decides to do
regarding amateur radio. I've been in it almost 30 years, and have
enjoyed every minute, but other than stringing up wires and mini-beams, have n
ot done
any tower climbing and don't plan on it any time soon. BTW, I have
great respect for the potential risk of climbing up heights - I climbed up on
the roof
of my parent's home with my father (an electrician who climbed for a
living)  as a teenager. Looking down at the ground
from 35 feet up, on a ladder, you definitely gain respect for the potential
dangers of being up that high. Definitely not something to do unless
you're sure-footed, and make sure every step is carefully taken and
deliberate.Again - its easy to mis-step and just one wrong step can mean the e
nd. Moral
of my story - if you do climb and do so infrequently, do it with someone who k
nows what they're
doing. If not, get professional help - stay on the ground, and be a
"director". Leave the dangerous stuff to the pros. The end result will
 be the same, but you'll be safe and sound on the ground looking up
proudly at that antenna beamed to DX land. You'll be glad you did.

73,
Bob, KD4ZN/3


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:27 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!cs.utexas.edu!news.ti.com!newsfeed.mc.ti.com!usenet
From: "Loek d'Hont" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Goodbye.
Date: 14 Oct 1996 03:58:50 GMT
Organization: quantex
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <01bbb983$e73fe800$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53lre2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-dsbd2-0013.itg.ti.com
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29951 rec.radio.swap:91108 rec.radio.cb:36422


Our hobby can be dangerous, that's for sure.
And what happened to this poor individual should be a warning for all of
us.
I got my share when I was much younger than today, used to build my own
stuff , all tube-based, and as some of you might know, tubes work on
relatively high voltages.....

Got zapped so bad one day from one hand to the other that it made me
throw-up for several days, couldn't keep anything in.
Sometimes I still wake up in the night in a shock, reliving the whole thing
again, 25 years after the fact.
I NEVER touch anything of any piece of equipment any more with two hands
when doing repair work, and make damn sure I wear good insulating shoes
when I have to work on electrical equipment...
One could say that the switch-over to transistors that I made years ago in
building stuff might have saved my life!

I also lost a ham friend 15 years ago who worked for the power and light
company, he was badly burnt in an accident that happened in a 10kV
distribution station, when he tried to pull his partner away from a live HT
switch that the guy was about to grab. His partner died on the spot, but he
lived for 3 more days and then died.  I will spare you the details  from
what we saw when we visited him in the hospital, one day before he actually
died.

I also have a friend who almost lost his fingers when climbing his crank-up
tower. Just when he got out of the tower, the steel cable on the winch
snapped, and the two higher elements slammed in the bottom one. Had he
still been in it just seconds before, all his fingers would have been cut
off like in a scissor.

One can not be careful enough. Messages like the "goodbye" message that was
posted makes one realize that.


Gary Klechowitz <[e-mail]> wrote in article
<53lre2$[e-mail]>...
> Life in general has its risks because we are mortal. Some
recreation/hobbies have
> more risks than others. There certainly is more risk in persuing sky
diving than
> there is in collecting stamps.
>
> I used to climb roofs and take some risks years back when I was first
involved in
> ham radio. Today if I get re-involved in ham radio (I am considering
that) I will
> probably opt to take less risks or put up antennas that do not involve so
much risk.
>
> Your accident is very unfortunate but is not the fault of the hobby in
general.
> Years back I have known many OMs that put antennas on high roofs and
towers and
> lived to tell about it. I have also heard of persons installing TV
antennas that
> have either been electrocuted or fallen off the roof as you did so is
watching TV
> worth the risk? Your love for the hobby is put to the test. Maybe it
wasnt worth the
> risk to you.
>
> Gary K.
>
>


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:28 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!ix.netcom.com!newsgate.compuserve.com!newsmaster
From: Steve Eklund <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Goodbye.
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 09:00:19 -0700
Organization: Unigraphics, Incorporated
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hd35-091.compuserve.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E-CIS  (Win16; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:116461 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30001 rec.radio.swap:91200 rec.radio.cb:36450

Scott A. Nelson wrote:
> >
> > Whatever happened to that novel idea of Personal Responsibility? Although
I am truly
> > sorry for your misfortune, I have found that in my life, I have always bee
n either
> > directly or indirectly responsible for each of my "accidents"... Every per
son plots
> > his/her own course in life...
> >
> > Should we ban cars because of drunks? How about matches because of fires,
or pools
> > because of drownings? I think not.
> >
> > <<< DAN >>>
> > --
> > +-------------------------------------------------------+
> > |An Armed Man is a Citizen, an Unarmed Man is a Subject.|
> > +-------------------------------------------------------+I slipped and fel
l in the shower a couple of years ago and I manage to
> stay clean.
>
>                                 -- Scott --


Don't be surprised if the things you mention really does happen. These
damned politicians are trying to ram more and more laws down our throats
every day. All it will take is some fruitcake special interest group to
donate half a million dollars to re-elect some bozo, (I purposly left it
lower case because I don't want to insult some clown) and lobby for a
bill that requires a professional lifeguard to be on duty and there goes
your backyard pool. There are those out there that are already trying to
take our cars away and the reason that they have not succeeded is that
the major automobile manufacturers have more pull in Washington.

Anyway, I wish you well Ken, but instead of leaving the hobby you can
always start using indoor antennas, or antennas that are ground-mounted.

73 from Steve

P.S. I heard the tail end of a news report about a 1500 foot tower
falling down over the weekend. Does anybody know the full story?


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:30 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!metro.atlanta.com!news.radio.org!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Goodbye.
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 16:05:06 GMT
Lines: 25
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:116503 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30024 rec.radio.swap:91267 rec.radio.cb:36468

In article <[e-mail]> Steve Eklund <72527.01012@compuserve
.com> writes:
>
>P.S. I heard the tail end of a news report about a 1500 foot tower
>falling down over the weekend. Does anybody know the full story?

Yeah, it was in a suburb of Dallas. Apparently a crane was blown
over by a wind gust and severed a guy wire. The tower then buckled
and fell, carrying some workers up top down with it. This is always
a concern with a guyed tower. The workers had apparently discussed
stopping work for the day due to the wind, but decided to press
on. This turned out to be a terminally stupid decision.

Hams can draw two important lessons from this, protect your guys,
and quit work if the wind picks up more than you like. You can
bet I'm not going to be on a tower when it is windy enough to
blow over a construction crane if I can help it. I did get caught
on a 1,000 footer once by a sudden thunderstorm. Whee! That's
an experience I never want again.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:31 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.tek.com!netman.ens.tek.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Terry Burge)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Goodbye.
Date: 15 Oct 1996 13:42:43 -0700
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton, OR, USA
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <540t03$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53lre2$[e-mail]> <01bbb983$e73fe800$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: netman.ens.tek.com
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30029 rec.radio.swap:91287 rec.radio.cb:36471

>I also have a friend who almost lost his fingers when climbing his crank-up
>tower. Just when he got out of the tower, the steel cable on the winch
>snapped, and the two higher elements slammed in the bottom one. Had he
>still been in it just seconds before, all his fingers would have been cut
>off like in a scissor.

This brings up one thing I did not mention in my previous post converning
climbing towers. A crank-up tower is an accident waiting to happen for any-
one who trys to climb it. When ever you must, first insert steel pipes or
bars across the sections and lower the tower sections onto them. Most I
have seen will require one or two pipes across a couple of places. And
MAKE CERTAIN all the sections are sitting on the pipe/bar and won't drop
another inch or so. Your fingers will thank you for it.

Never climb a crank-up tower when it is extended.

Terry



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:33 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.tek.com!netman.ens.tek.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Terry Burge)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Goodbye./Tower Climbing
Date: 14 Oct 1996 16:11:41 -0700
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton, OR, USA
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <53uhbd$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <53poud$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: netman.ens.tek.com
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30003 rec.radio.swap:91209 rec.radio.cb:36452

The whole idea of tower climbing shouldn't frighten anyone who can stand
heights and knows enough to take appropriate precautions. To say a ham
should hire only professionals to do their tower work is a bit too far
for me to accept. You don't have to have a professional do your tower work.
You just need to act like a professional and take the appropriate precautions
such as having and using a good climbing belt, verifying that the guys, tower
sections, antennas are tight and not going to come appart on you. And plan
the work out. Also, noone ever got accused of being stupid by using a second
line to the tower when you are up there...a safety line incase one doesn't
work. Don't forget if you drop a couple of feet you are putting probably two
or even three times as much weight on your safety rope as your own weight...
plan accordingly and use strong, high quality rope or stranded steel cable
to keep you up there. And have an assistant on the ground.

THINK about what you are going to do before you do it. You don't get second
chances and all it takes is one mistake, so plan it out and follow your plan
and take your time. But don't think you can't do it when you can if you
act appropriately. If you don't want to do it, fine. That's your decision
to make. But don't start thinking hams who work on there towers should be
using professionals. If they do it right, they do just what the professionals
would do. Maybe not with a crane or cherry picker but with safety belts,
knowledgable help, a secondary safety line, and a well thought out plan.

How many 4 squares or stacked monobanders do you think hams relied upon
professional to install? They did it themselves.  You don't win contest
or rule in pileups by relying on others.

Terry
KI7M




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:34 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.ksu.ksu.edu!mccall.com!news.flinthills.com!news.mid.net!wormer.fn.net![e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Subject: Re: Goodbye./Tower Climbing
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: Ken Bessler <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 19:11:08 -0500
References: <[e-mail]>
 <[e-mail]> <53poud$[e-mail]>
 <53uhbd$[e-mail]>
Organization: Design Services Company
NNTP-Posting-Host: fsc235.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: Terry Burge <[e-mail]>
Lines: 16
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30014 rec.radio.swap:91249 rec.radio.cb:36462

Hi people, This is Ken Bessler (the originator of this thread). I got a
little bored today and the email on this thread stopped so I decided to
re-subscribe to this NG to see what's up.

I noticed that the subject has changed. I would just like to point out
that I was not on a tower - I was on the peak of my roof (single story).

Thanks to all those who sent well wishes.

                                Ken Bessler (formerly KG0WX)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
***Police department's motto: "To serve and protect"
***Bomb squad's motto: "If you see us running, CATCH UP!"
***My motto:"Hobbies aren't worth dying for."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:34 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!ix.netcom.com!newsgate.compuserve.com!news.production.compuserve.com!news
From: Roger Cox <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GPS Mobile Antenna?
Date: 11 Oct 1996 17:19:47 GMT
Organization: Telex Comm.
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <53lvjj$dko$[e-mail]>
References: <53b91g$[e-mail]>

QST October 1995 has an article about making a CP patch antenna
for GPS.

Roger WB0DGF

--
Roger Cox


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:35 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.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] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GPS Mobile Antenna?
Date: 18 Oct 1996 19:50:01 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 1
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <549539$[e-mail]>
References: <53lvjj$dko$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Yes, and its --huge--..


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:36 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!enews.sgi.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!news
From: [e-mail] (Jim Roberson)
Newsgroups: rec.ham-radio,rec.ham-radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.swap,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Ham Gear for Sale....
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 20:48:01 -0500
Organization: Zippo
Lines: 22
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: access-1-5.rollanet.org
X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v1.01
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29871 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:40559 rec.radio.amateur.misc:116320 rec.radio.swap:90947

I have the following Ham Gear FOR SALE....

Kenwood TS-450AT w/ narrow SB Filter and Heil Desk Mic.  It's in
Mint Condition and works fine.  Price: $ 750.00 + shipping

Nye Viking Roller Inductor Tuner Model MB-V-A .  Great Shape & Works
Fine.  Price: $ 400.00 + shipping

Henry 2k-4 Console Amp.  Has new transformer.  Works Great and Looks
just as good.  Because of size this is pickup only....  Price: $ 750.00

Reason for selling is that I just got married a few months ago and
either the Ham Gear or me go.

Make all replys to:

[e-mail]

Thanks for reading....

Jim



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:37 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!nntp.crl.com!syix.com!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.ham-radio,rec.ham-radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.swap,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: Ham Gear for Sale....
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 96 17:41:18 GMT
Organization: Baka Engineering Service
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: treasure-d18.syix.com
X-Newsreader: Quarterdeck Message Center [2.00]
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29900 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:40597 rec.radio.amateur.misc:116353 rec.radio.swap:90993

I have the following Ham Gear FOR SALE....
>
> Kenwood TS-450AT w/ narrow SB Filter and Heil Desk Mic.  It's in
> Mint Condition and works fine.  Price: $ 750.00 + shipping
>
> Nye Viking Roller Inductor Tuner Model MB-V-A .  Great Shape & Works
> Fine.  Price: $ 400.00 + shipping
>
> Henry 2k-4 Console Amp.  Has new transformer.  Works Great and Looks
> just as good.  Because of size this is pickup only....  Price: $ 750.00
>
> Reason for selling is that I just got married a few months ago and
> either the Ham Gear or me go.

Hey, fair is fair, make her give up all her hobbies too, and see what she says

then. It goes both ways.

Bill




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:38 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!netnews.nwnet.net!wrq.com!usenet
From: Doug Wetzel <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.ham-radio,rec.ham-radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.swap,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: Ham Gear for Sale....
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 20:15:18 -0700
Organization: WRQ
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.215.90.23
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29911 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:40604 rec.radio.amateur.misc:116366 rec.radio.swap:91013

> Me thinks you married unwisely.  :^)
> --
> Dick Flanagan W6OLD CFII ([e-mail]) Minden, Nevada

'Married' and 'unwisely' in the same sentence is redundant....

Doug
KC7CO


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:39 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.zeitgeist.net!news.greatbasin.net!usenet
From: Dick Flanagan <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.ham-radio,rec.ham-radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.swap,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: Ham Gear for Sale....
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 16:40:37 -0700
Organization: Libelle Productions, Inc., Minden, Nevada USA
Lines: 12
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)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29915 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:40612 rec.radio.amateur.misc:116374 rec.radio.swap:91036

Jim Roberson wrote:
>
> Because of size this is pickup only....

Naturally you don't tell us where you live.

> Reason for selling is that I just got married a few months ago and
> either the Ham Gear or me go.

Me thinks you married unwisely.  :^)
--
Dick Flanagan W6OLD CFII ([e-mail]) Minden, Nevada


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:39 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.wco.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Evan Platt)
Newsgroups: rec.ham-radio,rec.ham-radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.swap,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: Ham Gear for Sale....
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 06:43:41 GMT
Organization: N/A
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.48.88.71
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29960 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:40658 rec.radio.amateur.misc:116426 rec.radio.swap:91130

Dick Flanagan <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> Because of size this is pickup only....
>
>Naturally you don't tell us where you live.

My guess is MO. I did a whois on his .org address, and they are based
in Rolla, MO.

>Me thinks you married unwisely.  :^)

Me agrees..


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:40 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!ix.netcom.com!news
From: KD1YV <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: Ham Gear for Sale....
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 09:57:42 -0300
Organization: Hamily !
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dby-ct2-19.ix.netcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-NETCOM-Date: Mon Oct 14  6:57:43 AM PDT 1996
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win16; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.misc:116435 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29967 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:40664 rec.radio.swap:91138

Jim Roberson wrote:
 >
 > Because of size this is pickup only....

 > Reason for selling is that I just got married a few months ago and
 > either the Ham Gear or me go.

I love that CQ t-shirt that says "My wife said if I didn't get off of the radi
o, she'd
leave me ... over"

I'm fortunate enough to have a wife and daughters that are all involved in the
 hobby.
We make it a great family activity, volunteering together, being involved with
 clubs,
schools, etc.

Just my $0.01 (after taxes.)
--
73 de Jim, KD1YV


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:42 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.mindspring.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (John West)
Newsgroups: rec.ham-radio,rec.ham-radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.swap,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: Ham Gear for Sale....
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 13:18:09 GMT
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <53qq5l$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53oduq$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip69.albuquerque.nm.interramp.com
X-Server-Date: 13 Oct 1996 13:17:41 GMT
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29975 rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors:2 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:40671 rec.radio.amateur.misc:116438 rec.radio.swap:91150

[e-mail] (N1XYY) wrote:

>Get rid of her . . .

>[e-mail] (Tony White) wrote:

>>>I have the following Ham Gear FOR SALE....
>>>
>>>Kenwood TS-450AT w/ narrow SB Filter and Heil Desk Mic.  It's in
>>>Mint Condition and works fine.  Price: $ 750.00 + shipping
>>>
>>>Nye Viking Roller Inductor Tuner Model MB-V-A .  Great Shape & Works
>>>Fine.  Price: $ 400.00 + shipping
>>>
>>>Henry 2k-4 Console Amp.  Has new transformer.  Works Great and Looks
>>>just as good.  Because of size this is pickup only....  Price: $ 750.00
>>>
>>>Reason for selling is that I just got married a few months ago and
>>>either the Ham Gear or me go.

>>I'm sure you'll miss her... :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)

Love is blind, and they say marrage is an instution, but who wants to
live in an instution for the blind!
N3WMT





From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:43 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!nntp.uio.no!nntp.zit.th-darmstadt.de!fu-berlin.de!informatik.tu-muenchen.de!lrz-muenchen.de!news.unibw-muenchen.de!bauv111!claude
From: [e-mail] (Claude Frantz)
Newsgroups: rec.ham-radio,rec.ham-radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.swap,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: Ham Gear for Sale....
Date: 15 Oct 96 13:23:27 GMT
Organization: University of the Federal Armed Forces Munich
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <claude.845385807@bauv111>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: bauv111.bauv.unibw-muenchen.de
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #3 (NOV)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30007 rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors:9 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:40706 rec.radio.amateur.misc:116477 rec.radio.swap:91228

Dick Flanagan <[e-mail]> writes:

>Jim Roberson wrote:
>>
>> Because of size this is pickup only....

>Naturally you don't tell us where you live.

>> Reason for selling is that I just got married a few months ago and
>> either the Ham Gear or me go.

>Me thinks you married unwisely.  :^)

I agree.
--
Claude
([e-mail])
The opinions expressed above represent those of the writer
and not necessarily those of her employer.


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:44 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!EU.net!super.zippo.com!zdc!szdc!szdc-e!news
From: [e-mail] (Robert Fowle)
Newsgroups: rec.ham-radio,rec.ham-radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.swap,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: Ham Gear for Sale....
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 17:06:01 GMT
Organization: The HAMMARLUND Historian
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <5434en$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30060 rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors:39 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:40765 rec.radio.amateur.misc:116563 rec.radio.swap:91390

Dave Booth <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Ramon Gandia wrote:
>>
>> Jim Roberson wrote:
>> >
>> > I have the following Ham Gear FOR SALE....
>> >
>> > Kenwood TS-450AT
>> > Henry 2k-4 Console Amp.
>> > Reason for selling is that I just got married a few months ago and
>> > either the Ham Gear or me go.
>>
>> Jim:
>>
>Hummm........


>By my new wife!!!!!!!!!!!
>Dave Booth kc6wfs
>http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/5860/

I'm affraid it would be hard..but, gee, I'd sure miss her...

8-)


=================================================]-[->
Robert Fowle      KC8DBC
The HAMMARLUND Historian
Ph. 517-789-6721
1215 Winifred
Jackson, Mich. 49202-1946
E-mail:  [e-mail]
Web Page:  http://www.jacksonmi.com/hammarlund
                 HAMMARLUND LITERATURE WANTED
WANTED: MANUALS FOR ANY MAKE RADIO EQUIPMENT
=================================================]-[->
Boatanchors: the list: [e-mail]......subscribe boatanchors <your
name>
       the news group: rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:45 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!munnari.OZ.AU!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Mike Smith-VE9AA, Coreen Smith-Wynder Photo)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Ham II variable resistor source?
Date: 16 Oct 96 12:51:32 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

My pot in my ham II is shot!
(no indication) It's been on it's way out for
quite some time, and finally went kaplooey about
6 months ago.(ugh!) Does anyone know where
I might obtain another potentiometer?
anyone know the value of the thing?, size?
mounting bracket? Could I fashion one from a radio-shack
unit? And lastly, if "NO" to the Shack; is there a Canadian source?
Many thanks to the group!
-MIKE, ve9aa
Michael & Coreen Smith (AA Antennas & Wynder Photography)
271 Smith Rd, Waterville,
Sunbury Co.,NB, Canada
E2V 2G3

Vhf buffs;
See the *NEW* AA Antenna web page at:
http://members.tripod.com/~ve9aa/index.html


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:46 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.icanect.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Terry Simonds)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ham II variable resistor source?
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 13:48:58 GMT
Organization: Icanect
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <5481pv$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.142.166.24
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Mike Smith-VE9AA, Coreen Smith-Wynder
Photo) wrote:

->My pot in my ham II is shot!
->(no indication) It's been on it's way out for
->quite some time, and finally went kaplooey about
->6 months ago.(ugh!) Does anyone know where
->I might obtain another potentiometer?
->anyone know the value of the thing?, size?
->mounting bracket? Could I fashion one from a radio-shack
->unit? And lastly, if "NO" to the Shack; is there a Canadian source?
->Many thanks to the group!
->-MIKE, ve9aa
->Michael & Coreen Smith (AA Antennas & Wynder Photography)
->271 Smith Rd, Waterville,
->Sunbury Co.,NB, Canada
->E2V 2G3

->Vhf buffs;
->See the *NEW* AA Antenna web page at:
->http://members.tripod.com/~ve9aa/index.html

That pot is a custom wire-wound affair, specifically designed for the
rotator. Have you tried Hy-Gain? I think they still make the Ham II. I
have had your problem before with the Ham II.  It gave erratic
readings around 60 degrees, which is where I usually left it. I solved
it by parking the beam at either full-scale or zero. What was
happening, I discovered after I took the thing apart, was when the
beam rocked back and forth slightly in the wind, the copper wiper slid
back and forth on the resistance-wire winding. It didn't wear it out,
but for some reason caused a buildup of crud there. I cleaned it off,
and all has been fine since.

Have you put an ohmmeter to the pot? If it still shows a circuit maybe
you can resurrect the thing by disassembling the rotator (not for the
faint of heart! Easy to take apart, but a bear to put back together!),
and cleaning the windings. If the pot is open, you'll have to contact
the manufacturer or pick up another Ham II at a flea market. Or look
out the window and see where the beam is pointing!  :)

In case you don't have the docs on the thing:

Telex-Hy Gain
9600 Aldrich Ave.
Minneapolis, MN 55420
612-884-4051 voice
612-884-0043 fax

The pot part no. is 51460-10

Good luck!


73 Terry/WB4FXD
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:46 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.voicenet.com!netaxs.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!spool.mu.edu!munnari.OZ.AU!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Ralph Brooks)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: ham-ant
Date: 16 Oct 96 23:14:20 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

subscribe



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:47 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!server-b.cs.interbusiness.it!usenet
From: [e-mail] (IZ8ANA  Gerry)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Help needed with SWR problems!
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 22:34:55 GMT
Organization: Centro Servizi Interbusiness
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 195.120.75.40
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.275

Hi to all,
I have strange problems with SWR:
I use a A3S Cushcraft Antenna and a D40 Cushcraft rotative dipole on a
15 m tower mounted on teh top of 10 floors building.
Using A3S direct to my radio I have no problems, SWR is 1:1, but if I
connect in line the amplifier (TL922) SWR goes up to 1,5 - 1,7 in 20
mts and 10 mts, in 15 mts all is as usual (this problem persist also
if the amplifier is turned off).
I think I have problems with something in the RF sections inside my
amplifier, but what?



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:48 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!OzEmail!OzEmail-In!news
From: Nick Wymant <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Help needed with SWR problems!
Date: 13 Oct 1996 10:53:11 GMT
Organization: OzEmail Ltd - Australia
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <53qhmn$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.108.200.47
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (IZ8ANA  Gerry) wrote:
>Hi to all,
>I have strange problems with SWR:
>I use a A3S Cushcraft Antenna and a D40 Cushcraft rotative dipole on a
>15 m tower mounted on teh top of 10 floors building.
>Using A3S direct to my radio I have no problems, SWR is 1:1, but if I
>connect in line the amplifier (TL922) SWR goes up to 1,5 - 1,7 in 20
>mts and 10 mts, in 15 mts all is as usual (this problem persist also
>if the amplifier is turned off).
>I think I have problems with something in the RF sections inside my
>amplifier, but what?
>

Have you measured the VSWR with aplifier running into a dummy load ?
Is it the cable between the TX and the Aplifier, can you run via cable
into antenna without amplifier ?

Regards
Nick Wymant.



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:50 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!cbgw2.lucent.com!nntphub.cb.lucent.com!news
From: Sheldon Darack <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Help needed with SWR problems!
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 12:47:02 -0400
Organization: Lucent Technologies, Columbus, Ohio
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53qhmn$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pcshel.wh.lucent.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I)

Nick Wymant wrote:
>
> [e-mail] (IZ8ANA  Gerry) wrote:
> >Hi to all,
> >I have strange problems with SWR:
> >I use a A3S Cushcraft Antenna and a D40 Cushcraft rotative dipole on a
> >15 m tower mounted on teh top of 10 floors building.
> >Using A3S direct to my radio I have no problems, SWR is 1:1, but if I
> >connect in line the amplifier (TL922) SWR goes up to 1,5 - 1,7 in 20
> >mts and 10 mts, in 15 mts all is as usual (this problem persist also
> >if the amplifier is turned off).
> >I think I have problems with something in the RF sections inside my
> >amplifier, but what?
> >
>
> Have you measured the VSWR with aplifier running into a dummy load ?
> Is it the cable between the TX and the Aplifier, can you run via cable
> into antenna without amplifier ?
>
> Regards
> Nick Wymant.

Gerry:
You are not clear, but from your description it sounds as if you are
measuring the swr at the output of the transmitter, before the amplifier
perhaps using a transmitter with a built in swr circuit. Is that the
case?  If so, when the amplifier is off, blame the swr on the antenna
changeover relay in the amplifier.  When the amplifier is operating,
blame it on the tuned input circuit of the amplifier.  Often, that can
be adjusted on each band.  However, the values you give are nothing to
be concerned with.

Shel  WA2UBK


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:51 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sover.net!news.monad.net!usenet
From: "George J. Molnar" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Help needed with SWR problems!
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 10:28:36 -0400
Organization: Molnar & Associates, Inc
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: leb1-async-4.cyberportal.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
To: IZ8ANA Gerry <[e-mail]>

IZ8ANA Gerry wrote:
>
> Hi to all,
> I have strange problems with SWR:
> I use a A3S Cushcraft Antenna and a D40 Cushcraft rotative dipole on a
> 15 m tower mounted on teh top of 10 floors building.
> Using A3S direct to my radio I have no problems, SWR is 1:1, but if I
> connect in line the amplifier (TL922) SWR goes up to 1,5 - 1,7 in 20
> mts and 10 mts, in 15 mts all is as usual (this problem persist also
> if the amplifier is turned off).
> I think I have problems with something in the RF sections inside my
> amplifier, but what?

Doesn't sound like a problem at all. Maybe the input circuit to the amp
is slightly out of alignment, but not grossly. In any event, if the
antenna is matched to the line, and the radio (or amp) is delivering the
proper power to the load (amplifier or antenna), there's no problem at
all.

73

--
George J. Molnar
Molnar & Associates, Inc.
Lebanon, New Hampshire
Business: http://www.cyberportal.net/gmolnar/molnar.html
Personal: http://www.cyberportal.net/gmolnar/index.html


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:53 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!ifwtech.demon.co.uk!G3SEK
From: "Ian White, G3SEK" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Help w/ vertical radials
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 23:21:51 +0100
Organization: IFW Technical Services
Lines: 28
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <AlkNQAA$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
 <53llg3$[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 3.01 <9qI82xurdT5+zee3Wovwfh3yMs>

W8JI  Tom wrote:
>The best and safest idea is to use as many nice straight radials as
>possible, up to 60 1/4 wl long wires or 120 1/2 wl long radials is nearly
>perfect. With 1/8 wl radials only 30 are enough, but you signal will be
>weaker the fewer wires you use. That means for the higher bands you may
>want to interspace an equal number of short fifteen foot wires if you use
>something like 60 30 foot radials for 40 meters.

In every case Tom mentioned, the distance between the far ends of the
radials is about 0.025 wavelengths.

If we think of the radials as making a ground screen to prevent
significant currents from circulating in the earth beneath, 0.025wl is
quite a reasonable figure for the maximum allowable wire spacing that
will still ensure negligible "leakage". It's in the same ballpark as the
mesh size needed to ensure high reflection efficiency from a dish
antenna.

If this is correct, it would be a very simple guide to the number of
radials required for a given length.

Any comments, please?


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] Sat Oct 19 10:01:54 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.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] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Help w/ vertical radials
Date: 11 Oct 1996 10:27:15 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 45
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <53llg3$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

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

>
>       Thanks for reading my message. I am setting up a hygain multiband
>vertical antenna and I need some assistance on the ground radials. I do
>not have enough room to put our a full radial field. However, I would
like
>to put out mor than the minimum of 16- 14 foot radials. I do not have the
>room to put out radials longer than 20 feet. I would like to put out at
>least 60 radials. Question: can I use 60 radials of less that .25
>wavelength and still get the advantage in gain that is possible with this
>number of radials? Also: Could I use 8 radials for each band cut to the
>resonant frequency I need for each band and still get the antenna gain
for
>64 radials. Are there any other suggestions of what I might do to
increase
>the antenna gain within the limitaions of space I have described. I would
>need radials for 40 meters to 10 meters.
>       Thanks for your help. Please send responses to
>[e-mail]
>Mike KT4AN
>
>

Hi Mike,

There is less and less need to tune the radials as more are added. There
is less and less need to use a lot of radials if you only use a few.

But the fewer radials you use the poorer the antennas performance.

The best and safest idea is to use as many nice staright radials as
possible, up to 60 1/4 wl long wires or 120 1/2 wl long radials is nearly
perfect. With 1/8 wl radials only 30 are enough, but you signal will be
weaker the fewer wires you use. That means for the higher bands you may
want to interspace an equal number of short fifteen foot wires if you use
something like 60 30 foot radials for 40 meters.

You'll have to figure out how much work you want to do. I did a lot of
work an a 35 foot top loaded vertical ground and on 80 it almost always
ties my dipole at ~135 feet into Europe. That is my observation from
dozens and dozens of A-B test signal reports.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:55 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!mr.net!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HELP WITH CB RADIO INTERFERANCE. (SP)
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 96 05:29:12 GMT
Organization: Not Enough
Lines: 19
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <53nag7$[e-mail]>
References: <53kimj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

 [e-mail] (T. Mooney) wrote:

>any one know how I can get rid of cb cross channeling? When
>I transmit it cross' with the phone lines..

This problem is common in many CB transmitters.  With 3 to 5 watts
output, energy induced in nearby appliances (including telephones)
usually falls in the non-linear region of the devices.  This
causes rectification of the RF, which in turn creates audible (or
visible) interference.  The solution is to move the level of
induced energy above the non-linear window.  In most cases,
500 to 600 watts is sufficient to saturate the active devices at
radio frequencies, preventing internal modulation and nullifying
the lower frequency symptoms.  My suggestion is to purchase the
largest amplifier you can afford, and gradually raise the output
power of your system until the difficulties are resolved.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:56 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.alfred.edu!clicnet!news.clic.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!n3ott.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!n1van.istar!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!feed1.news.erols.com!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!nrnegus.demon.co.uk!nrnegus
From: Nicholas Negus <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HELP WITH CB RADIO INTERFERANCE. (SP)
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 12:52:38 +0100
Organization: Home
Lines: 11
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <53kimj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: nrnegus.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: nrnegus.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 3.00 <gFCpp4XJvWc15njtBfLe2+klpv>

In article <53kimj$[e-mail]>, "T. Mooney" <[e-mail]> writes
>any one know how I can get rid of cb cross channeling? When I transmit
>it cross' with the phone lines.. I have a realistic cb.. (which is
>probably not important) and also a 5 foot RAMI fiberglass whip antenna
>on a 10 foot pole in the ground in the back yard. Will raising the
>antenna higher help? what if I put it on the roof? what about
>attaching it to the chimney? Please help me out!
>
Easy! Get the phone company to fit a suppressor.
--
Nicholas Negus


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:57 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!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] (K1BQT)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HELP!  Need advise and suggestions on HF Vertical
Date: 11 Oct 1996 18:56:25 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 14
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <53mjap$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (K1BQT)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

When you install a "no-radial" elevated-feed antenna near the ground, you
are--in essence-- taking an inherently-balanced radiator and unbalancing
it by mounting it with the ends in unequal proximity to a highly
absorptive and lossy medium (dirt). In theory, there's nothing seriously
wrong with any of these antenna designs.  However, the manufacturers don't
very often make it a point to inform buyers to mount as high as possible
above ground in order to achieve optimal results.  Tests I've conducted
here indicate that any antenna of this type installed less than 1/4-wave
AGL will deteriorate in performance VERY rapidly--the closer to the
ground, the worse it gets.

RIck -- K1BQT




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:58 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!quagga.ru.ac.za!uct.uni.net.za!iafrica.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (John Atkinson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: help?? Is this possible?
Date: 16 Oct 1996 08:56:38 GMT
Organization: Internet Africa
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <542807$cpl$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 196-7-171-196.iafrica.com
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.1

Hi all,

I am trying to radiate power at 141 MHz into an antenna that needs
to fit in a plastic box approx 10*8*3 cm. The box will be placed in
a vehicle and the signal must have at least 20 km range to an aircraft.
The vehicle will be in a city environment.
Power available from the transmitter is approx 50mW.
Tall order or achievable???
Is this possible or should I just use an electrically short whip?

Any comments will be appreciated.
thanks,
John



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:01:59 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!nntp.newsfirst.com!nntp.crosslink.net!munnari.OZ.AU!news.mel.connect.com.au!news.melbpc.org.au!news
From: [e-mail] (Alan Fowler)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF mobile antennas: silver plated wire?
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 10:29:37 GMT
Organization: Melbourne PC User Group Inc, Australia
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <53l7ki$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bilby17.melbpc.org.au
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (David Feldman) wrote:

>Would silver plated wire, when used to wind resonators, improve efficiency
>and/or power handling capacity of a coil loaded HF mobile antenna?

>73 Dave WB0GAZ [e-mail]

        Silver plating usually increases the r.f. resistance of a conductor,
unless the wire has been plated from an extremely pure bath containing
no additives.  So far, I haven't found anyone still using this
process.

        Silver plating baths used in the last 30 years or so contain
"brightners" which co-deposit with the silver to give a smooth, bright
finish.  Unfortunately, these finishes have much higher resistance
than pure copper.

        The best result is obtained from electrical grade wire or tubing with
the thinnest posible covering layer of a low-loss dielectric.

        You should also look at the antenna itself.  Do NOT use one that has
been chrome plated.  Underneath the chrome there is usually a layer of
nickel, and this is one of the lossiest materials you can use.  You
will usually do far better to use a stainless steel whip.

                regards,  Alan.

  ,-._|\  Alan Fowler.
 /  Oz  \ Mail Address: PO Box 272, Balwyn 3103 Vic, AUSTRALIA.
 \_,--.x/ Phone: [phone]  Member, Melbourne PC User Group.
       v  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:01 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!munnari.OZ.AU!news.mel.connect.com.au!news.melbpc.org.au!news
From: [e-mail] (Alan Fowler)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF mobile antennas: silver plated wire?
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 10:36:00 GMT
Organization: Melbourne PC User Group Inc, Australia
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <53l80h$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bilby17.melbpc.org.au
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (David Feldman) wrote:

>Would silver plated wire, when used to wind resonators, improve efficiency
>and/or power handling capacity of a coil loaded HF mobile antenna?

>73 Dave WB0GAZ [e-mail]

        Silver plating usually increases the r.f. resistance of a conductor,
unless the wire has been plated from an extremely pure bath containing
no additives.  So far, I haven't found anyone still using this
process.

        Silver plating baths used in the last 30 years or so contain
"brightners" which co-deposit with the silver to give a smooth, bright
finish.  Unfortunately, these finishes have much higher resistance
than pure copper.

        The best result is obtained from electrical grade wire or tubing with
the thinnest posible covering layer of a low-loss dielectric.

        You should also look at the antenna itself.  Do NOT use one that has
been chrome plated.  Underneath the chrome there is usually a layer of
nickel, and this is one of the lossiest materials you can use.  You
will usually do far better to use a stainless steel whip.

                regards,  Alan.

  ,-._|\  Alan Fowler.
 /  Oz  \ Mail Address: PO Box 272, Balwyn 3103 Vic, AUSTRALIA.
 \_,--.x/ Phone: [phone]  Member, Melbourne PC User Group.
       v  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:02 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!munnari.OZ.AU!news.mel.connect.com.au!news.melbpc.org.au!news
From: [e-mail] (Alan Fowler)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF mobile antennas: silver plated wire?
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 10:36:30 GMT
Organization: Melbourne PC User Group Inc, Australia
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <53l81g$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bilby17.melbpc.org.au
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (David Feldman) wrote:

>Would silver plated wire, when used to wind resonators, improve efficiency
>and/or power handling capacity of a coil loaded HF mobile antenna?

>73 Dave WB0GAZ [e-mail]

        Silver plating usually increases the r.f. resistance of a conductor,
unless the wire has been plated from an extremely pure bath containing
no additives.  So far, I haven't found anyone still using this
process.

        Silver plating baths used in the last 30 years or so contain
"brightners" which co-deposit with the silver to give a smooth, bright
finish.  Unfortunately, these finishes have much higher resistance
than pure copper.

        The best result is obtained from electrical grade wire or tubing with
the thinnest posible covering layer of a low-loss dielectric.

        You should also look at the antenna itself.  Do NOT use one that has
been chrome plated.  Underneath the chrome there is usually a layer of
nickel, and this is one of the lossiest materials you can use.  You
will usually do far better to use a stainless steel whip.

                regards,  Alan.

  ,-._|\  Alan Fowler.
 /  Oz  \ Mail Address: PO Box 272, Balwyn 3103 Vic, AUSTRALIA.
 \_,--.x/ Phone: [phone]  Member, Melbourne PC User Group.
       v  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:03 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!newsfeed.concentric.net!winternet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!nntp.teleport.com!ip-pdx02-27
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF mobile antennas: silver plated wire?
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 96 10:06:41 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <53nqhe$[e-mail]>
References: <53frti$[e-mail]> <53ln1k$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx02-27.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <53ln1k$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:

>. . .

>Even a very small conductor copper or tin plated copper coil can have VERY
>high Q, the 300's are practical. If the wire size becomes too large,
>maximum obtainable Q actually drops! Copper tubing is one example, it's
>much too big for optimum Q.

>. . .

Do you have any idea what the mechanism is for this? Too much shunt C,
lowering the effective L?

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:04 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!munnari.OZ.AU!news.mel.connect.com.au!news.melbpc.org.au!news
From: [e-mail] (Alan Fowler)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF mobile antennas: silver plated wire?
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 12:21:00 GMT
Organization: Melbourne PC User Group Inc, Australia
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <53o2hc$[e-mail]>
References: <53frti$[e-mail]> <53ln1k$[e-mail]> <53nqhe$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bilby35.melbpc.org.au
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) wrote:

>In article <53ln1k$[e-mail]>,
>   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:

>>. . .

>>Even a very small conductor copper or tin plated copper coil can have VERY
>>high Q, the 300's are practical. If the wire size becomes too large,
>>maximum obtainable Q actually drops! Copper tubing is one example, it's
>>much too big for optimum Q.

>>. . .

>Do you have any idea what the mechanism is for this? Too much shunt C,
>lowering the effective L?

        I have use 1 1/2" copper tubing for very high Q coils.  The important
things to remember are:
1.  It must be electrical grade copper (100% I.A.C.S)
2.  The length and diameter of the coil should be roughly the same.
3.  The spacing between turns should be about 60% of the tube
diameter.
4.  The spacers must be a good, low-loss dielectric.
5.  There must be no metal screws, nuts, or fittings.  I used nylon
screws and nuts.
6.  Keep the coil well clear of other conductors or metal sheets.
7.  There should be no unused turns on the coil - i.e. it should be
designed to be a particular inductance.  If the coil is tapped at ONE
end, then the unused turns should be shorted  from the end to the tap.
8.  As a rule of thumb the current carrying capapcity of a copper
conductor is about 76 Amps per inch diameter of the tube.  This very
specific figur has been used for years and years by equipment
manufacturers.  It's not that accurate,  many, many years ago a French
engineer measured the current carrying capacity of copper tubing.  He
found that at 30 A per cm it was too hot, at 20 A per cm it was cold
and at 25 A per cm it was just right.  An English speaking engineer
converted this on the basis of 2.54 cm = 1 inch, got 76.2 A per inch
and rounded it off to 76!  Shades of Goldilocks and the three bears.
9.  There are a few more points, but I cannot remember them offhand.
I'll try and remember them tomorrow.
                Regards  Alan.

        Those coils were part of a dual 50 kW MF aerial coupling unit.
6.
>Roy Lewallen, W7EL




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:05 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!feed1.news.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] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF mobile antennas: silver plated wire?
Date: 11 Oct 1996 10:53:40 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 50
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <53ln1k$[e-mail]>
References: <53frti$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (David Feldman)
writes:

>Seriously (sort of) it seems that resonators get hot during transmit
>(to varying degrees depending on power, band, resonator type, etc.),
>and what I'm trying to figure out is to what extent this heat is a
>culprit in loss (relative to an unloaded antenna) and if the heat could
>be reduced by improved conductivity in the coil (at the expense of Q and
>bandwidth).
>
>73 Dave WB0GAZ

Hi Dave,

While some of the loss is due to the resistance of the wire, most of the
loss is due to poor coil design and placement.

You'd see very little improvement by silverplating, and the plating would
have to be thick.

Things like metal near the coil (end caps or other mounting hardware),
insulation over the wires, and insulating materials that add capacitance
to the coil all hurt Q. They all increase the circulating current in the
coil, as well as adding dissipative materials to the system.

Even a very small conductor copper or tin plated copper coil can have VERY
high Q, the 300's are practical. If the wire size becomes too large,
maximum obtainable Q actually drops! Copper tubing is one example, it's
much too big for optimum Q.

The optimum size for wire is between number eight and sixteen for a HF
coil as a general rule, the optimum spacing from turn to turn is one turn
diameter, the optimum wire shape is round, and the best insulation is air.
The best diameter varies with wire size, being larger as wire size
increases and having a form factor  (L/D ratio) between 1:4 and 4:1. The
less parallel capacitance in the circuit, the longer the coil should be
for optmum Q at the operatng frequency.

The highest Q mobile antenna coil I've ever had was a Q in the high 300's.
It was not silver plated. The highest Q silver plated tubing coil I have
ever measured was around 200. Since ground losses dominate any HF mobile
below 20 meters using a good antenna, the largest improvement WOULD come
from silver plating the highway.

I hope this helps you.

73 Tom





From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:07 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!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: HF mobile antennas: silver plated wire?
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 17:28:12 +0100
Organization: IFW Technical Services
Lines: 31
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <53frti$[e-mail]>
 <53ln1k$[e-mail]> <53nqhe$[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 3.01 <9qI82xurdT5+zee3Wovwfh3yMs>

Roy Lewallen wrote:
>In article <53ln1k$[e-mail]>,
>   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
>
>>. . .
>
>>Even a very small conductor copper or tin plated copper coil can have VERY
>>high Q, the 300's are practical. If the wire size becomes too large,
>>maximum obtainable Q actually drops! Copper tubing is one example, it's
>>much too big for optimum Q.
>
>>. . .
>
>Do you have any idea what the mechanism is for this? Too much shunt C,
>lowering the effective L?

So says Terman - or at least, too much distributed C and too many
opportunities for dielectric losses iin supports, wire enamel etc.

(I think this is a case where an old text such as Terman gives more
direct access to the "ancient wisdom" than something published more
recently. This topic was pretty thoroughly worked out in the earliest
days of "wireless telegraphy".)

Didn't W7XC write about optimum wire diameter and spacing in the context
of Top Band loading coils, a few years ago in QST?

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] Sat Oct 19 10:02:07 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.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: HF mobile antennas: silver plated wire?
Date: 14 Oct 1996 17:57:55 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 24
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <53ud13$[e-mail]>
References: <53smmv$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <53smmv$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Peter
Somlo) writes:

>
>Tom, all you need is about 2~3 skin-depth in the silver, for
>practically all the current to flow in the silver, so why do you
>regard a plating thickness of about 0.002 in. `thick'?
>
>Peter

I didn't word my point well. My point was that a silver flash won't change
anything electrically, and thicker platings (platers I've delt with talk
in "tenths" or ten-thousandths of an inch). I've seen a lot of home
projects that do a quick silver flash and that's much too thin to change
things.

A silver flash won't do anything unless you are trying to stop corrosion,
so you might as well coat the copper with a cheap but very thin good
dielectric or tin it.

In any event, even if money is spent for thicker platings (in thousanth's
rather than ten thousandths), the Q change is still small.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:09 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!EU.net!Norway.EU.net!sn.no!nntp.uio.no!nntp.zit.th-darmstadt.de!fu-berlin.de!news.belwue.de!news.belwue.de!news.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de!gelleric
From: [e-mail] (Wolfgang Gellerich)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF mobile antennas: silver plated wire?
Date: 14 Oct 1996 08:34:22 GMT
Organization: Informatik, Uni Stuttgart, Germany
Lines: 18
Sender: gelleric@kafka (Wolfgang Gellerich)
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <53stue$[e-mail]>
References: <53frti$[e-mail]> <53ln1k$[e-mail]> <53nqhe$[e-mail]> <53o2hc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kafka.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de

In article <53o2hc$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Alan Fow
ler) writes:

|> 8.  As a rule of thumb the current carrying capapcity of a copper
|> conductor is about 76 Amps per inch diameter of the tube.  This very
|> specific figur has been used for years and years by equipment
|> manufacturers.  It's not that accurate,  many, many years ago a French
|> engineer measured the current carrying capacity of copper tubing.  He
|> found that at 30 A per cm it was too hot, at 20 A per cm it was cold
|> and at 25 A per cm it was just right.  An English speaking engineer
|> converted this on the basis of 2.54 cm = 1 inch, got 76.2 A per inch
|> and rounded it off to 76!


That's interesting -- do you remember where this result was published ?

vy 73,

  Wolfgang DJ3TZ


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:09 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!EU.net!Norway.EU.net!sn.no!nntp.uio.no!nntp.zit.th-darmstadt.de!fu-berlin.de!news.belwue.de!news.belwue.de!news.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de!gelleric
From: [e-mail] (Wolfgang Gellerich)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF mobile antennas: silver plated wire?
Date: 14 Oct 1996 08:51:11 GMT
Organization: Informatik, Uni Stuttgart, Germany
Lines: 17
Sender: gelleric@kafka (Wolfgang Gellerich)
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <53sutv$[e-mail]>
References: <53frti$[e-mail]> <53ln1k$[e-mail]> <53nqhe$[e-mail]> <53o2hc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kafka.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de

In article <53o2hc$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Alan Fow
ler) writes:

|> 8.  As a rule of thumb the current carrying capapcity of a copper
|> conductor is about 76 Amps per inch diameter of the tube.  This very
|> specific figur has been used for years and years by equipment
|> manufacturers.  It's not that accurate,  many, many years ago a French
|> engineer measured the current carrying capacity of copper tubing.  He
|> found that at 30 A per cm it was too hot, at 20 A per cm it was cold
|> and at 25 A per cm it was just right.  An English speaking engineer
|> converted this on the basis of 2.54 cm = 1 inch, got 76.2 A per inch
|> and rounded it off to 76!

And, what I forgot to ask in my previous posting, was that measurement
done with AC or DC ? If AC, at what frequency and if DC, how thick are
the tube's walls?

73, Wolfgang DJ3TZ


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:10 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!demos!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF mobile antennas: silver plated wire?
Date: 18 Oct 1996 16:13:12 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <548aao$[e-mail]>
References: <53frti$[e-mail]> <53ln1k$[e-mail]> <53nqhe$[e-mail]> <53o2hc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

In article <53o2hc$[e-mail]>,
Alan Fowler <[e-mail]> wrote:
>6.  Keep the coil well clear of other conductors or metal sheets.

>7.  ....  If the coil is tapped at ONE
>end, then the unused turns should be shorted  from the end to the tap.

Hi Allan,

I hope you realize thet these requirements exclude mutually.
If you allow a few shorted turns at the end of a coil,
you might just as well have a metal sheet there.

Both will have much the same effect.

73, Moritz DL5UH


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:11 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.erols.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!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: HF mobile antennas: silver plated wire?
Date: 19 Oct 1996 06:23:45 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 22
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54aa7h$[e-mail]>
References: <548aao$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <548aao$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] () writes:

>
>Hi Allan,
>
>I hope you realize thet these requirements exclude mutually.
>If you allow a few shorted turns at the end of a coil,
>you might just as well have a metal sheet there.
>
>Both will have much the same effect.
>
>73, Moritz DL5UH

Right Moritz.

It's not exactly as bad as a metal plate, but almost.

If you want a high Q coil, NEVER short turns or leave a large amount of
unused turns hanging there.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:13 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.mindspring.com!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!OzEmail!OzEmail-In!news
From: Nick Wymant <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF Polarization
Date: 19 Oct 1996 03:29:56 GMT
Organization: OzEmail Ltd - Australia
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <549hvk$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <544kq2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.15.163.27
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)

[e-mail] (Bob Bruhns) wrote:
>Cecil Moore ([e-mail]) wrote:
>: An antenna I'm working on has vertical radiation at low angles
>: and horizontal radiation at high angles. At 27deg TOA, vertical
>: and horizontal components are equal. After bouncing off the
>: ionosphere does polarization matter? (I'm talking about sky
>: waves, not ground waves).
>
>  The ionosphere rotates polarization all over the place.  It supposedly
>has something to do with the earth's magnetic field in the conductive
>ionosphere.  And supposedly, at any instant the rotation is either right
>or left hand, regardless of signal direction.  An English fellow named
>Sykes found that most short-term fading on 10 meter beacons seems to be
>caused by intermittent cross-polarization between the downcoming signal
>and the receive antenna.  I decided to experiment on 75 meters.
>

Do you know if anybody has experimented on 10, 15 or 20 meters with
Circular polarisation ?

It seems that this might reduce the deep fades produced by polarisation
mismatch caused by the randomness of the ionesphere.

I have always wanted to try a pair of crossed yagis with 90 deg phase
shift to produce CP on 10 meters, but have never got around to it.

Regards   Nick Wymant



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:14 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsserv.freeway.net!news
From: Dave Wright - N8IT <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: HF remote base antenna?
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 19:25:41 -0400
Organization: "Freeway (TM) - America's Public Information Network"
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: n8it.freeway.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b5a (Win95; I)

Our group has installed a hf remote base and we are tring to figure out
the best antenna.  Our site is a fm broadcast tower, so we have one very
large vertical support.  We want all ham bands, 160 thru 10 meters, one
feed line and low swr.  What kind of ideas does everyone have?
--
dave - n8it
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:15 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!News.MO.NET!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: HF5B Butterfly beam ?'s
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 05:46:16 GMT
Organization: -=MO.NET=- MVP-Net, Inc's Missouri Operations
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <53pn0i$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm3x13.dialip.mo.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

I am currently struggling to tune a butterfly beam HF5B from
Butternut,  interested in any and all coments from those who have
used (tuned) them.
73 de KB0MSE Jeff



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:16 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!EU.net!news.eunet.fi!jjo
From: [e-mail] (Jari Jokiniemi)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF5B Butterfly beam ?'s
Date: 14 Oct 1996 14:53:32 GMT
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <53pn0i$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ds10.tekla.fi
In-reply-to: [e-mail]'s message of Sun, 13 Oct 1996 05:46:16 GMT

In article <53pn0i$[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
   I am currently struggling to tune a butterfly beam HF5B from
   Butternut,  interested in any and all coments from those who have
   used (tuned) them.

I did not have any problems in tuning the antenna. I just followed the
instructions. All the problems I ever had with the HF5B were due to
corrosion in the contacts. (And there are plenty of those in the HF5B.)
After two years of operation the antenna needed a total cleaning using
some stuff which is used to clean rust from cars.

--
Jari Jokiniemi, [e-mail], OH2MPO, OH3BU
Tekla Oy, Koronakatu 1, 02210 Espoo, 90-8879 474


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:17 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!csn!nntp-xfer-1.csn.net!csn!nntp-xfer-2.csn.net!stortek!tatro
From: [e-mail] (Patrick Tatro)
Subject: Re: HF5B Butterfly beam ?'s
Message-ID: <540aug$[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: Storage Technology Corporation
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3
References: <53pn0i$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 15:34:40 GMT
Lines: 38

In article <53pn0i$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] wrote:

>Subject: HF5B Butterfly beam ?'s
>Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 05:46:16 GMT

>I am currently struggling to tune a butterfly
beam HF5B from Butternut,  interested in any and
all coments from those who have used (tuned) them.

>73 de KB0MSE Jeff
>

Jeff
  I have a Butterfly that I tuned for a roof
mounted location.  I followed the instructions and
it tuned very well with an antenna analyzer. The
trick is to follow the instructions carefully and
repeat some steps until you get the correct
results. I think you also need to tune it at
operating altitude. You might also check that all
the parts are in the correct location. Many of the
parts look nearly the same but have different
values. The problem I was having was that I had no
directivity. I did contact the manufacturer and
described my installation and the fact that I
wasnÆt getting the directivity I though I should.
 They sent me a letter suggesting that I get as
much elevation as possible to reduce interaction
with the household wiring. I found that by raising
the antenna just 6 feet there was a dramatic
improvement in performance. My antenna is at 36
feet.

If I can be of any further help contact me at:
  [e-mail]

73's Pat N0WCG


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:19 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.mindspring.com!mindspring!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!metro.atlanta.com!news.radio.org!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: High gain directional antenna for FM radio
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <5371mu$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 11:38:26 GMT
Lines: 68

In article <5371mu$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Richar
d Kaiser) writes:
>Sorry this is not a ham antenna question, but this is the only antenna group.
>
>I just moved into the fringe area of the only FM radio station to broadcast a

>favorite radio station (Thistle and Shamrock).  I am also getting a little
>interference from another station in the opposite direction on the same
>frequency (91.5 MHz).
>
>I figured out I had a problem with stock dipole.  I also tried an amplified
>antenna, but it wasn't directional.
>
>I am looking for any suggestions on a high gain directional antenna.
>A directional amplified antenna that actually improves the signal to
>noise ratio may also work.  The one I tried increased the received
>power, but didn't change the signal to noise.

No amplifier can improve the SNR. Amplifiers can only degrade the SNR
presented to their input because they contribute noise of their own to
the system. (Note of course that a preamp with a low SNR degradation of
its own, IE a low noise figure, can improve *system* SNR if the receiver
has a first amplifier with a poor noise figure. This is different from
improving SNR per se.)  A directional antenna *can* improve SNR because
it rejects noise coming from directions other than the direction of the
desired signal. This results in the ratio of signal to noise presented
to the receiver or preamp actually being improved.

Gain is a separate matter altogether. Gain can be applied anywhere
in the system from antenna to speaker. Depending on several factors,
including intrinsic noise figure of the stages and their susceptability
to overload, a particular distribution of gain may be better than
others. Too much gain in front of a receiver can be harmful if it
causes overloading of subsequent stages. Thus a "hot" preamp can
hurt instead of help. Usually, you only want enough preamp gain to
set system noise figure, and no more.

>If I need to build something I have a patio closet I can build in.
>Construction needs to stay reasonable as I am in the bottom floor of
>a three floor apartment.  (Maybe I will be a home owner next year.)

Well, at VHF, there is no real substitute for height. Not only
will your effective line of sight radius be better with a higher
antenna, thus giving a stronger signal, but also you'll be less
likely to have multipath because you are above reflective clutter
in the local environment. It is difficult to get an effective
directional antenna advantage in the presence of multipath.

A 5 or more element yagi mounted on the roof of your apartment
house is the best solution to your problem. If that's impossible
in your situation, then a tuned loop may help. Orient it so that
the null faces the offending station and hope that multipath
doesn't cause too much signal to still be received from that
station. If the stations are exactly 180 degrees apart, the
loop won't work because its null is bidirectional. You'll need
some other directional antenna. The key thing is the ability
to null unwanted signals and noise, however, and not antenna
"gain" per se.

(Though antenna "gain" and directionality go hand in hand, IE an
antenna gets "gain" by robbing signal in some directions in order
to favor other directions. An antenna isn't an amplifier, it is
a focusing device.)

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:19 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!nntp.uio.no!news.cais.net!wilbur.ohww.norman.ok.us!ionews.ionet.net!usenet
From: Hank Blackstock <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Horizontal vs. Vertical Polarization
Date: 18 Oct 1996 19:45:30 GMT
Organization: Internet Oklahoma
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <548moq$[e-mail]>
References: <5472mv$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pri3-28.ionet.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2N (Windows; I; 32bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (James) wrote:
>Why is it that Commercial broadcast stations, both radio and TV
>(AM&FM, audio, video) use vertically polarized antenna's, yet the
>high-gain beam/Yagi's available to consumers (Radio shack, ect) for
>their TV's and FM radios are horizontally polarized elements?
>-Just a thought that popped into my head while in the 'loo....
>-pylon
>
>


What makes you think that TV and FM signals are vertically
polarized?

Hank WA5JRH






From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:21 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.cdsnet.net!news.magicnet.net!iag.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sgi.com!newshub.sdsu.edu!newshub.csu.net!newsserver.sdsc.edu!news.cerf.net!hacgate2.hac.com!news.delcoelect.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Paul J. Dobosz)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Horizontal vs. Vertical Polarization
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 00:08:01 GMT
Organization: Delco Electronics Corp.
Lines: 41
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <548v16$[e-mail]>
References: <5472mv$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: repc5015.rey.delcoelect.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent v0.46

James - Your information is in error ....

Comercial FM stations (almost without exception) utilize
circular polarazation to accomodate both vertical masts
on cars and horizontal antennas for residential use.  The circular
polarized signal accomodates both polarizations with only 3dB of
polarization mismatch loss as opposed to 20dB+ if linear polarization
was transmitted

AM stations utilize vertical polarization exclusively, but that is
seldom an issue since receiving antennas in most cases are so small
with respect to the wavelength that they exhibit no real polarization
and are almost totally reactive (capacitive) .  They behave like a
capacitive probe than an antenna.

Television stations (VHF & UHF) use horizontal polarization because
their major target audience is residential.  This lends itself well to
high gain horizontal yagis of the type you commonly see on rooftops
all over the US.

I'm not sure where you got your information on broadcast engineering
practice, but most of the polarizations you describe haven't ever been

in common use in the US for the past 40 years.

Paul Dobosz - K8PD



[e-mail] (James) wrote:

>Why is it that Commercial broadcast stations, both radio and TV
>(AM&FM, audio, video) use vertically polarized antenna's, yet the
>high-gain beam/Yagi's available to consumers (Radio shack, ect) for
>their TV's and FM radios are horizontally polarized elements?
>-Just a thought that popped into my head while in the 'loo....
>-pylon






From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:21 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!btnet!btinternet!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jason Williams-Lock)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Horizontal vs. Vertical Polarization
Date: 18 Oct 1996 23:01:24 GMT
Organization: none
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <549284$[e-mail]>
References: <5472mv$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: host-73-36-96.btinternet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.8 (x86 32bit)

[e-mail] (James) says:
>
>Why is it that Commercial broadcast stations, both radio and TV
>(AM&FM, audio, video) use vertically polarized antenna's, yet the
>high-gain beam/Yagi's available to consumers (Radio shack, ect) for
>their TV's and FM radios are horizontally polarized elements?
>-Just a thought that popped into my head while in the 'loo....
>-pylon
>
>

I think vertical polarisation is easy to pick up on an omni-direction aerial
such as a vertically mounted dipole, you don't need to point it broadside
onto the transmitter. Here in the u.k, vertical polarisation appears to be
used by low power relay stations, but we also have something called "mixed
polarisation", that is *both* vertical and horizontal components, this is to
improve reception on car and portable radios.

Regards,

Jason



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:22 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!newspump.sol.net!news.mindspring.com!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!OzEmail!OzEmail-In!news
From: Nick Wymant <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Horizontal vs. Vertical Polarization
Date: 19 Oct 1996 03:18:05 GMT
Organization: OzEmail Ltd - Australia
Lines: 51
Message-ID: <549h9d$[e-mail]>
References: <5472mv$[e-mail]> <548moq$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.15.163.27
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)

Hank Blackstock <[e-mail]> wrote:
>[e-mail] (James) wrote:
>>Why is it that Commercial broadcast stations, both radio and TV
>>(AM&FM, audio, video) use vertically polarized antenna's, yet the
>>high-gain beam/Yagi's available to consumers (Radio shack, ect) for
>>their TV's and FM radios are horizontally polarized elements?
>>-Just a thought that popped into my head while in the 'loo....
>>-pylon
>>
>>
>
>
>What makes you think that TV and FM signals are vertically
>polarized?
>
>Hank WA5JRH
>
>
>
>
From my experience with installing FM and TV TX antennas (in Australia at
least) is that TV transmitting antennas are mainly horizontally polarised
in main cities, and either horizontal or vertical in outer areas. The
polarisation is used to provide some protection between adjacent zones
where the same channel is re-used. ie: as added insurance against a far
away transmitter on the same channel interfering with the close
transmitter.

In Australia, nearly all FM stations use Circular polarisation (see
preceeding messages for description). Circular polarisation has the
benefit that the recieving antenna can be oriented at any angle, and
still pick up most of the signal. In fact, a halo antenna with the ends
bent up/down can be made to produce CP, and is the basis for many CP
antennas made in the USA.

Another variation used in FM antennas is Slant polarisation, where the
dipole is oriented to 45 degrees from vertical. Like CP, recieve antennas
which are either VP of HP can pick up the signal transmitted from a slant
polarised antenna. Again like CP, there is a 3 dB loss unless the RX
antenna is also slant polarised.
A good example of a slant polarised FM antenna can be seen at the top of
the Empire State Building. At the base of the spire at the top, is a ring
of dipoles (about 20 around the base of the spire), slanted at 45
degrees, which I believe are FM antennas. You can just make them out from
the ground, but you can see them very clearly from the upper observation
deck.

Regards

Nick Wymant.



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:24 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-3.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-22.sprintlink.net!ratty.wolfe.net!usenet
From: Ramon Gandia <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Horizontal vs. Vertical Polarization
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 02:40:44 -0800
Organization: Anvil Technology
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <5472mv$[e-mail]> <548moq$[e-mail]> <549h9d$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: nome-ts1-p01.nome.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
CC: [e-mail]

Nick Wymant wrote:

> In fact, a halo antenna with the ends
> bent up/down can be made to produce CP, and is the basis for many CP
> antennas made in the USA.

See my post related to this question.  Such a halo antenna does *not*
produce circular polarization.  It merely sends out a certain
percentage of the signal horizontally polarized, and another portion
vertically polarized.

To create C.P., you need two antennas, one vertical and one
horizontal, fed in quadrature, or 90 degrees phase.  Example
would be two dipoles assemble like a cross.  The feedline
goes to one dipole, and a quarter wave transmission line
connects the other dipole to the first.  The quadrature
feed imparts the proper twist to the wave, so that depending
on where in the r.f. cycle the received signal is at, the
polarization changes from horizontal, slowly around to vertical
then continues around to horizontal again, and smoothly again
to vertical on once r.f. cycle.

In the U.S., the main reason to use dual polarization (the halo
or dipole with ends bent up and down) is to provide both
signals so radio sets with one type or the other antenna can
receive it.  Our government allows broadcasters to transmit
at full licensed power horizontally, and to add as much vertical
power as wanted, as long as it does not exceed the horizontal
power.  Theoretically, this could be equal power, for a
transmitter then putting out double the licensed power.  Such
a scheme must be approved, of course, but is automatic and does
not gain the station any extra coverage (on paper) but merely
fills in the areas that a automobile radio would have fades, etc.

Most stations do not devote that much power to vertical.  Vertical
is typically automobile radios, which operate under adverse
conditions and do not have as much range as a home with an
external F.M. antenna.

As far as I know, TV stations only go horizontal here in the U.S.,
but your description of the Australian system to bring co-channel
stations closer together but using different polarization is
good thinking.  I bet you in those cases, the stations involved
usually carry the same programme and share one channel with various
transmitters in a given region....  just a guess!

COPY OF THIS POST BY E-MAIL too.

--
In order to foil SpamBots, my e-mail address is not
machine readable.  Please reply to address below:

Ramon Gandia,    Nome, Alaska  |    rfg.at.nome.dot.net
AL7X          S/V Seven Stars  |
907-443-2437 fax [phone]  | where at=@  dot=period


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:24 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.iij.ad.jp!nntp.hk.super.net!tst.hk.super.net!usenet
From: R Ho <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: How to build a 800MHz Yagi?
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 21:59:24 +0800
Organization: DVM
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: max4-22.hk.super.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Hi,

I wish to build a 830MHz 6 element data transmission YAGI myself.

Can anyone tell me how to build one. It would be nice if someone

can supply me with the specification of such Yagi (e.g. the

element position from rear of boom, element length.....e.t.c.).

Is there anything special about the driven element of 800MHz

Yagi? Do we build them the same way as building a 2 Meters

band Yagi?

Thank you

Mr R Ho (AK)
[e-mail]
14-Oct-96


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:25 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!guardian!news
From: "Richard J. Smith" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: HOw to improve AM radio reception
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 10:21:54 -0500
Organization: Colossus Internet Services
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip12.forbin.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; U)

I am looking ofr a "home made" method to improve my am radio reception
in my home and outside in my garage. I want to pick up Chicago radio
stations from NE Iowa. I can barely right now without additional
antennas.

Can anyone help me?

Thanx! Rick Smith


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:26 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.magg.net!news.one.se!mcevans.tip.net.!newsfeed.tip.net!news.jos.net!dos.canit.se!seunet!mn7.swip.net!mn6.swip.net!mn5.swip.net!news
From: Maude Schyffert <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HOw to improve AM radio reception
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 18:22:55 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup110-2-2.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 3.01b1Gold (Win16; I)

Richard J. Smith wrote:
>
> I am looking ofr a "home made" method to improve my am radio reception
> in my home and outside in my garage. I want to pick up Chicago radio
> stations from NE Iowa. I can barely right now without additional
> antennas.
>
> Can anyone help me?
>
> Thanx! Rick Smith

Dont complain put up a wire..... SM0BKZ


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:27 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.bctel.net!news.mag-net.com!aurora.cs.athabascau.ca!rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!mongol.sasknet.sk.ca![e-mail]
From: (Copper Penny)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How to make a Gin Pole
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 21:17:31 GMT
Organization: SaskNet News Distribution
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: badger32.sk.sympatico.ca
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227

On Thu, 10 Oct 1996 15:52:26 -0700, Bill Rahl <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Does anyone recall a article in 73 magazine about making a Gin Pole?
>I thought I saw one awhile back, maybe in Oct 95 or maybe even 96.
>      I would like to make one as I am installing a 50' self supporter.
>
>                                              Thanks ,
>                                              Bill
>                       [e-mail]
>
Well Bill how about checking out the Elmer Hamlet at
http://www.gth.com/antenna
Once the page comes up go in the Antenna Elmer, then Construction
Tips, and finally (Raising Antenna to its mounting position). Here
there is a description of a gin pole, hope this helps you out.
Good luck, Cheers.

Copper Penny.


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:29 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.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: How would I solve this?
Date: 12 Oct 1996 21:53:21 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 38
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <53pi2h$[e-mail]>
References: <53n4nl$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <53n4nl$[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>
>The fact that you saw 5 ohms instead of 1 ohm is not
>unimportant.  I'm curious as to how you measured this.  My
>calculations indicate that 2 turns on 2 cores should yield
>a reactance of ~2 ohms at 3.5 MHz.  Was your measurement
>made across both windings in series (I hope), or across a
>single winding?

Across the entire winding. By the way, the impedance changes a lot
depending on how tightly packed the windings are on the core. That's a
good way to adjust a toroidal tuned circuit to resonance.

But let's cut to the chase here.

First of all, this is the most lossy form of balun imaginable. Secondly,
it is a worse case impedance problem. It is NOT the ratio of balun
impedance to the load resistance that is the source of increased loss in
this unrealistic example. It is the very low termination reactance
presented to the tuner, and increased Q in the output capacitor to balun
path.

If the balun were even a hundred ohms, and the load several hundred ohms,
tuner losses would be much less. Such was the case with the little MFJ
tuner.

It does little good to give people an unclear picture of what really
happens. If someone uses a very low Z balun, and/ or locates a voltage
type balun a long distance from the tuner, he's asking for greatly
increased feedline (between the balun and the tuner) loss and increased
tuner loss.

If he uses a choke balun, the most he will suffer is increased feedline
radiation.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:31 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!mr.net!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How would I solve this?
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 96 03:58:59 GMT
Organization: Not Enough
Lines: 41
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <53n574$[e-mail]>
References: <53hqph$[e-mail]> <53lmpb$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
>[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>>Nevertheless, placing a
>>string of beads over the end of the line produces distinctly
>>different results than other types of baluns when things go
>>awry.  It should be remembered that this type of device does
>>not place windings (shunt reactance) across the feedline.

>It sure does.

Hi Tom, I don't think you understood what I meant.  Let's say
fifty feet of coax is necessary to reach the antenna.  If we
slip the beads over the end of that feedline, no windings have
been added across either the feedline or the load.

>In any event, the capacitance is not a problem at all unless
>the dielectric is very lossy. A pure capaciatnce or inductance
>shunting the line does NOT cause loss. It is a reactance, NOT
>a power dissipating resistance.

Perhaps you missed one of my other posts.  I explained that the
loss this creates may occur in other parts of the system.  I
never said the capacitance itself would exhibit loss.

>The loss would be no higher than using the same length of line
>as a transmission line. Even with a 100:1 SWR, the loss in a
>few feet of all but the poorest line is pretty low from the
>capacitance.

The interwinding capacitance (and its effects) will vary
considerably depending on how the balun is wound.  If it
is wound like an isolation transformer, the bulk of the
capacitance will likely be between the input and output.
On the other hand, if the balun is wound in the form of a
bifilar choke on a rod or toroid, the capacitance will
appear primarily as a shunt reactance across the
differential voltages.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:33 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How would I solve this?
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 96 04:39:14 GMT
Organization: Not Enough
Lines: 29
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <541p3c$[e-mail]>
References: <53rn8t$[e-mail]> <53sgch$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
>[e-mail] (WB3U) writes:

>Every choke balun behaves the same general way when analyzed as
>a four terminal device. It makes no difference if the balun is a
>made from coax, twin lead, or bifilar windings. It makes no
>difference if it is an air core or ferrite sleeves, as long as the
>balun is properly constructed.
>
>I tried to explain that earlier and there was no response. Let me try
to lead back into that again one last time. A long time ago I wrote:

     <snip>

Tom, I read it and responded at that time.  I did not disagree
with your analysis of the operation under the stated conditions.

>Unless you understand the voltages that appear across a choke
>balun, and the rules ANY choke balun follows, (even one made
>from coaxial line) we can't go much further with this.

This is the problem.  You want to apply these same rules when
no rules can, in fact, exist.  Neither you nor anyone else can
force a balun to abide by the rules you've described when it's
faced with an improper load.  Until you agree with that, as you
say, this isn't going anywhere.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:34 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.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] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How would I solve this?
Date: 15 Oct 1996 09:49:06 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 73
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <5404oi$[e-mail]>
References: <53sljs$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Jack,

That works much better, but you don't need to re-post the whole thing,
just the area under question.

I wrote:
>In any event, the capacitance is not a problem at all unless the
>dielectric is very lossy. A pure capaciatnce or inductance shunting
>the line does NOT cause loss. It is a reactance, NOT a power
>dissipating resistance. The loss would be no higher than using the
>same length of line as a transmission line. Even with a 100:1 SWR, the
>loss in a few feet of all but the poorest line is pretty low from the
>capacitance.

In context, my statement explains it pretty well Jack. I was simply
explaining a pure reactance does not dissipate power, and the length of
line through the balun (be it parallel wire or coaxial) has the same loss
as a transmission line would have. I assume when you look at your
transmission line you don't picture the shunt capacitance being the villan
that dissipates power? Or that you don't consider almost 30 pF per foot in
a coaxial line as "shunting power from the load"?

I was replying to your comment:

>the ease with which these
>devices can be overheated is the reason some suppliers
>recommend teflon coax for this use.  Nevertheless, placing a
>string of beads over the end of the line produces distinctly
>different results than other types of baluns when things go
>awry.  It should be remembered that this type of device does
>not place windings (shunt reactance) across the feedline.

Unless I'm mistaken, you were implying the turn to turn capacitance or
shunt capacitance causes heating in the balun, and that a coaxial choke
balun with beads behaves differently than any other type of choke balun.
That concept isn't accurate.

Additional loss caused by the series inductance and shunt capacitance in
the balun is no different than a transmission line of the same electrical
length for differential mode currents. The core or type of cable doesn't
even come into play except as that length cable (or parallel wire) affects
things as a transmission line.

The effect on the system can not be generalized, because system loss might
decrease, increase, or not change at all.

Common mode signals may actually be suppressed better with some additional
shunt capacitance, or perhaps not as well. In any event, unless the
reactances are very poor Q the largest effect would be a loss of common
mode power, power that is generally "unwanted"  or "undesireable" anyway.
The most likely effect of inadequate choking is  the system will start to
act like the balun wasn't there.

This issue is going to continue until we all understand how a balun works
FROM THE OUTSIDE VIEW.

The simplest way to view any choke balun is as a length of transmission
line, and as a common mode choke.

The core material and shunt winding capacitance from pair to pair only
affects common mode currents. The only signal dissipated or changed is the
common mode signal in the system. (Of course changing the common mode
impedance can change the differential mode characteristics via coupling at
the antenna, but that change is generally small.)

The balun behaves like a transmission line for normal transmission line
type signals. If I make my balun out of 50 feet of coax, it looks like
I've added 50 feet of coax to the system. If I make it out of twisted pair
and space the twisted pair properly, it acts like a transmission line of
the characteristic Zo of the twisted pair. The core has nothing to do with
this mode.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:36 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!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 would I solve this?
Date: 19 Oct 1996 06:12:35 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 29
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54a9ij$[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, not disagreeing, just trying to grok. KB7QJ has a 55ft
>centerfed with cores on the coax at the coax/ladder-line junction.
>On 75m, the core closest to the ladder-line gets to hot to touch.
>As I understand it, you are saying that heating is caused by
>common mode currents and differential mode currents would not
>cause heating. So the common mode power is being wasted. So
>my question is, wouldn't it be better to allow the common mode
>power to radiate? Probably a dumb question.
>
>73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC
>
>
Hi Cecil,

I think it's better to present a high impedance with little resistance, so
the power just stays in the antenna. But if you want the feedline to
radiate, let it radiate.

The actual power loss is pretty low in either case.

I like to not spoil antenna directivity here, becasue I use it to
advantage. A good feedline choke also prevents the receiver from picking
up unwanted noise from the house, or causing RFI from feedline coupling.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:36 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!insync!gryphon.phoenix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-12.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-22.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-3.sprintlink.net!news2.i-2000.com!news
From: "H. Mark Nadel" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Hygain Antenna - Portable HF  f/s
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 21:33:59 -0700
Organization: Amateur Radio Station - NK2T / AFA1FX
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: mineola23.access1.dh.i-2000.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I; 16bit)

F O R    S A L E.....

Hygain Tape Doublet antenna  3.5 - 30 mhz  $60.00 + shipping.


--




 "Always Available Through Technology..."


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:37 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!mr.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.one.net!news.one.net!news
From: Jim Nance <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Hygain th11
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 16:57:35 -0400
Organization: OneNet Communications HUB News Server
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port-10-27.access.one.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Anyone using a HyGain TH11?, if so, any comments on performance or
comparison's would be appreciated.

73 de KE4WY Jim


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:38 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsgate.compuserve.com!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: Mike Valentine <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: INFO : 2meter antenna DX
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 08:24:30 -0400
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 56.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 2.01E (Win95; U)

Gary Coffman wrote:
>

> The benefit of SSB or CW modulation is that they have a narrower
> effective rectangular bandwidth than FM, IE their modulation index
> is always *1*. This means that they will have proportionately better
> CNR than the FM signal. For those types of modulations, SNR=CNR. For
> FM, SNR does *not* equal CNR above the threshold. Below the threshold
> it does.

Not quite true, Gary.  FM signals below the "threshold" get worse on
the same slope that they get better above "threshold".  The same CNR/SNR
trade-off is still going on, but now it works against FM.  For a good
treatment of the relative performance of FM vs. SSB or AM, see
"Single-Sideband Systems & Circuits", McGraw-Hill, 1987, starting about
page 46.  Edited by William E. Sabin and Edgar O. Schoenike, it is an
expansion and revision of the 1964 classic by the same name.

Best regards,

Mike - WA8MSF


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:40 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!metro.atlanta.com!news.radio.org!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: INFO : 2meter antenna DX
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 10:33:11 GMT
Lines: 68

In article <[e-mail]> Don Huff <[e-mail]> writes:
>Susan Driggers wrote:
>>
>> I am looking for info on building a 2 meter antenna that would allow me
>> to use a Radio Shack (no jokes plese) handheld 5w transceiver to contact
>> anything .. :> Thanks.
>
>Susan,
>
> There is NO antenna that will allow you to contact 'anything'.

I believe you are misinterpreting Susan's request. She's looking for
an antenna which will allow her to contact someone, anyone *at all*.
Apparently she is having little or no luck making contacts with the
rubber ducky. In this regard, *any* outdoor antenna is likely to
fullfill her request. A J-pole or a simple 1/4-wave groundplane
mounted high and in the clear will perform much better than the
rubber ducky. Plans for these antennas, and many others, can be
found in the ARRL Antenna Book.

>Also, FM is not the mode of choice to use for weak-signal (DX) work.  It
>has an inherent 10 dB threshold effect, which means that signals weaker
>than about 3X the noise level will cease to be detectable at all.  This
>eliminates 90 pct of all the weak signals you might want to hear.  This
>is the reason that operators use SSB, or much better yet, CW, for weak
>signal work on any band.

You're mistating the FM threshold effect, Don. A very small CNR
increase above the noise floor allows the FM threshold effect to
enhance reception far out of proportion to the raw signal strength
increase, IE SNR is *not* one to one proportional to CNR with FM
signals. A 3 db CNR increase crossing the FM threshold can yield
a quieting level 10 to 20 db or more greater (the improvement factor
is proportional to modulation index, with higher modulation indexes
offering greater threshold improvements). This is one of the strengths
of FM, not a detriment. For most modern amateur FM equipment, the
threshold level is in the 0.15 to 0.25 microvolt range. Below the
threshold, detection probability is no worse than any other continous
carrier system of equivalent bandwidth. Above the threshold, the
apparent SNR is much better than for other simple modulation types.

The benefit of SSB or CW modulation is that they have a narrower
effective rectangular bandwidth than FM, IE their modulation index
is always *1*. This means that they will have proportionately better
CNR than the FM signal. For those types of modulations, SNR=CNR. For
FM, SNR does *not* equal CNR above the threshold. Below the threshold
it does. What this means is that for signals above the  threshold
level, FM will have a major advantage. For very weak signals, SSB and
CW will have a detection advantage, but only if the receiver uses
appropriately narrower filters (though they will still be darn
uncomfortable to listen to even so).

FM can be considered a weak form of spread spectrum. The FM
threshold can be considered a coding gain, with the gain being
proportional to the modulation index. Of course the coding systems
used in SS are more powerful than the naive FM threshold, yielding
improvements in excess of 30-40 db for most systems while having an
effective bandwidth (thanks to matched filtering rather than naive
rectangular filtering) of equal or lesser amount than SSB or CW.
Thus SS signals can be used at levels undetectable with simple SSB
or CW techniques.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:41 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpbs2500.boi.hp.com!bblohm
From: [e-mail] (Bill Blohm)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: INFO : 2meter antenna DX
Date: 14 Oct 1996 15:33:32 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Co.
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <53tmgc$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpbs1686.boi.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2.9]

: >Susan Driggers wrote:
: >>
: >> I am looking for info on building a 2 meter antenna that would allow me
: >> to use a Radio Shack (no jokes plese) handheld 5w transceiver to contact
: >> anything .. :> Thanks.

I've had good luck with either a coper J-pole, a simple 1/4 wave vertical
(~19" tall w 4 19" radials angled downward at 45 degrees on a square
aluminum plate, as shown in the handbook and antennae book). Range has
been excellent, hitting repeaters 30+ miles away. Sometimes I have trouble
with the rubber ducky that comes with it from inside, but that seems to
vary depending on what else is going on in the house (i.e. cordless phone
interference, etc.) and just going outside sometimes takes care of that.
Also, if you're having problems accessing repeaters, you might want to
check and be sure you're using the right offset and possibly a tone. In
the car, sometimes it works, sometimes not. A mag mount 5/8 whip on the
trunk or roof does wonders. And there are lots of those Radio Shack 202s
out there.

73 de Bill, KC7JSD


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:42 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!mr.net!news.clark.net!noos.hooked.net!news.scruz.net!NewsWatcher!user
From: [e-mail] (Ray Rischpater, KF6GPE)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: INFO : 2meter antenna DX
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 18:01:07 -0700
Organization: scruz-net
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <dove-1410961801070001@165.227.67.32>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 165.227.67.32

> >Susan Driggers wrote:
> >>
> >> I am looking for info on building a 2 meter antenna that would allow me
> >> to use a Radio Shack (no jokes plese) handheld 5w transceiver to contact
> >> anything .. :> Thanks.
> >
Susan,
I'm using the design in the 1996 ARRL Handbook for a portable 2m antenna,
made from a VHF connector and five lengths of quarter-wavelength wire.  It
was easy to make, and works suprisingly well, given my track record for
do-it-yourself projects.  I can email details if you like.

73, Ray

--
Ray Rischpater, KF6GPE                        [e-mail]
#include <disclaimer.h>


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:43 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!usc!newshub.cts.com!usenet
From: Dan Cornett <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Inverted "V" help
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 20:56:24 -0700
Organization: CTS Network Services
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dcornett.cts.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 40 meter inverted "V" for field day..What type of balum
should I use? A ratio of 1:1 or 4:1..??Whats the best? I need to feed my
transmitter with 50 0hm coax
 Any suggestions...
73's Dan  WB6BMJ


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:44 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sover.net!news.monad.net!usenet
From: "George J. Molnar" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Inverted "V" help
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 08:54:46 -0400
Organization: Molnar & Associates, Inc
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <54577g$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: leb1-async-2.cyberportal.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Bob Bruhns wrote:
>
> Dan Cornett ([e-mail]) wrote:
> : I am building a 40 meter inverted "V" for field day..What type of balum
> : should I use? A ratio of 1:1 or 4:1..??Whats the best? I need to feed my
> : transmitter with 50 0hm coax
>
>     Dan, if it is a half-wave inverted-V, and it is a single center-fed
>   wire, then you want a 1:1 balun.
>
Or none at all. Especially for a portable installation, why bother with
the extra weight when a balun on a 40m dipole won't make a real
difference in effectiveness?
73

--
George J. Molnar
Molnar & Associates, Inc.
Lebanon, New Hampshire
Business: http://www.cyberportal.net/gmolnar/molnar.html
Personal: http://www.cyberportal.net/gmolnar/index.html


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:44 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!li.net!bbruhns
From: [e-mail] (Bob Bruhns)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Inverted "V" help
Date: 17 Oct 1996 12:01:52 GMT
Organization: LI Net (Long Island Network)
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <54577g$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: linet01.li.net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Dan Cornett ([e-mail]) wrote:
: I am building a 40 meter inverted "V" for field day..What type of balum
: should I use? A ratio of 1:1 or 4:1..??Whats the best? I need to feed my
: transmitter with 50 0hm coax

    Dan, if it is a half-wave inverted-V, and it is a single center-fed
  wire, then you want a 1:1 balun.

    Bob Bruhns, WA3WDR, [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:45 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.erols.net!newspump.sol.net!iag.net!news.magicnet.net!news.cdsnet.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: Inverted "V" help
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 09:55:57 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <54577g$[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)

George J. Molnar wrote:
> ...why bother with the extra weight when a balun on a 40m dipole
> won't make a real difference in effectiveness?

Or just make about 10 turns of the coax around an empty plastic
pop bottle to keep RF out of the tent.

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


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:46 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!news-w.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!esgadm.esg.mk.com!news
From: Tim Shearer <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Inverted "V" help
Date: 18 Oct 1996 20:02:52 GMT
Organization: Morrison Knudsen
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <548npc$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 144.78.40.95
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)

Dan Cornett <[e-mail]> wrote:
>I am building a 40 meter inverted "V" for field day..What type of balum
>should I use? A ratio of 1:1 or 4:1..??Whats the best? I need to feed my
>transmitter with 50 0hm coax
> Any suggestions...
>73's Dan  WB6BMJ

I would not use a balun. Just make up an insulator with coax ceter to one
side and shield to the other. Make the dipole legs about 33 feet long
each to start. Throw a rope up in a tree 20-30 feet is fine. Pull up
center insulator and pull/spread dipole legs out to the side of the tree
so the angle is 90degrees or so. I use this while camping. It puts a fine
signal on the air for local qso s, not DX. The antenna will probably be
pretty close to resonance without tuning. check it (swr). If its less
than 2.5 to 1 in band, don't bother messing with it, IT IS NOT A LAB
GRADE REFERENCE DIPOLE. The signals will still gladly jump to and from
this aerial. If you want to run other bands on this dipole then consider
using ladder line instead of coax and a balanced tuner.

40 M is a great band at the right time of the day.

Tim KF8XW



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:48 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.deltanet.com!usenet
From: Chuck <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Inverted "V" help
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 13:16:28 -0700
Organization: Delta Internet Services, Anaheim, CA
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <548npc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ana0022.deltanet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)

Tim Shearer wrote:
>
> Dan Cornett <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >I am building a 40 meter inverted "V" for field day..What type of balum
> >should I use? A ratio of 1:1 or 4:1..??Whats the best? I need to feed my
> >transmitter with 50 0hm coax
> > Any suggestions...
> >73's Dan  WB6BMJ
>
> I would not use a balun. Just make up an insulator with coax ceter to one
> side and shield to the other. Make the dipole legs about 33 feet long
> each to start. Throw a rope up in a tree 20-30 feet is fine. Pull up
> center insulator and pull/spread dipole legs out to the side of the tree
> so the angle is 90degrees or so. I use this while camping. It puts a fine
> signal on the air for local qso s, not DX. The antenna will probably be
> pretty close to resonance without tuning. check it (swr). If its less
> than 2.5 to 1 in band, don't bother messing with it, IT IS NOT A LAB
> GRADE REFERENCE DIPOLE. The signals will still gladly jump to and from
> this aerial. If you want to run other bands on this dipole then consider
> using ladder line instead of coax and a balanced tuner.
>
> 40 M is a great band at the right time of the day.
>
> Tim KF8XW
I use a Ant. like this for my base Ant. I use a balun and tuned it to
get a 1.1 or 1.2 SWR.  With it I work 40 meters in the morning to Japan,
Russia, Indonesia etc with no trouble from Calif.. I would use the balun
at home but forget it while on field day.
Chuck S. W2NGB


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:49 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!nntp.uio.no!nntp.zit.th-darmstadt.de!fu-berlin.de!news.belwue.de!news.uni-freiburg.de!inn
From: Joachim Seibert <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Isotron-antenna ?
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 11:16:15 +0200
Organization: Universitaet Freiburg
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpfr01.physik.uni-freiburg.de
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (X11; I; HP-UX A.09.05 9000/710)

Dear reader,

I am looking for information on the Isotron-antennas. My main interest
is in
"home-building" such a thing... What kind of experience did You make
with
Isotrons?

Best 73s, Joachim DL1GSJ

--
best regards, Joachim Seibert

Mailto:[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:50 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!munnari.OZ.AU!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (JAMES MCEWEN)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Johnson Matchbox
Date: 16 Oct 96 23:12:28 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]


          Someone mentioned a few months back, they had costed out the
     manufacture of a "New" version of the Johnson Matchbox.  Maybe it
     is time to look at that again.  Last week a Matchbox was offered
     for $85.00, no test, no shipping, in the newsgroup
     Rec.Radio.Swap.
          I replied the next day and received a polite answer back,
     telling me I was number 17 to say I would buy it!  Maybe a
     "Matchbox kit", without the enclosure, would fly as an item of
     commerce.

     Jim KA6TPR



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:52 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Johnson Matchbox
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 96 02:50:11 GMT
Organization: Not Enough
Lines: 32
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <546rfc$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (JAMES MCEWEN) wrote:

>Someone mentioned a few months back, they had costed out the
>manufacture of a "New" version of the Johnson Matchbox.  Maybe it
>is time to look at that again.  Last week a Matchbox was offered
>for $85.00, no test, no shipping, in the newsgroup Rec.Radio.Swap.
>I replied the next day and received a polite answer back,
>telling me I was number 17 to say I would buy it!  Maybe a
>"Matchbox kit", without the enclosure, would fly as an item of
>commerce.

Hi Jim,

That was undoubtedly the "little" MatchBox you saw for sale.
It'll only handle about 1 KW.  ;)  I suspect the cost of new
parts to duplicate that unit would run $300 - 500 without the
cabinet, paint, or silkscreening.  In fact, just the knobs
would probably cost close to $75 if they were built like the
originals.

Unfortunately, this is one of those items that's difficult
to reproduce.  Nowdays, parts like that are used primarily
in commercial applications and their price has risen to the
occasion.  Also, single-ended tuners have pretty much taken
over the market.  Despite their limited usefulness in
balanced applications, they're cheaper to produce.  Most
hams don't seem to know the difference between the two types,
so convincing them to pay two or three times as much would
probably be an uphill battle.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:53 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-in2.uu.net!news.magicnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!ratty.wolfe.net!usenet
From: Ramon Gandia <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Johnson Matchbox
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 02:27:17 -0800
Organization: Anvil Technology
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: nome-ts1-p01.nome.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

JAMES MCEWEN wrote:
>
>
>           Someone mentioned a few months back, they had costed out the
>      manufacture of a "New" version of the Johnson Matchbox.  Maybe it
>      is time to look at that again.  Last week a Matchbox was offered
>      for $85.00, no test, no shipping, in the newsgroup
>      Rec.Radio.Swap.
>           I replied the next day and received a polite answer back,
>      telling me I was number 17 to say I would buy it!  Maybe a
>      "Matchbox kit", without the enclosure, would fly as an item of
>      commerce.

At $85 ?  Sure it would....  bet you can't offer it for less than
about $300 though.  Nice tuner, no baluns but has balanced or
unbalanced output, available in 300 watt or 1000 watt version, etc.
James Millen Mfg also made a nice one, same vintage, but the
EFJohnson Viking Matchbox was the best.
--
In order to foil SpamBots, my e-mail address is not
machine readable.  Please reply to address below:

Ramon Gandia,    Nome, Alaska  |    rfg.at.nome.dot.net
AL7X          S/V Seven Stars  |
907-443-2437 fax [phone]  | where at=@  dot=period


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:54 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!metro.atlanta.com!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!cs.utk.edu!news.msfc.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!uwm.edu!nntp.primenet.com!news.asu.edu!atkes
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Kurt's rectangle
Date: 13 Oct 1996 00:47:54 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <53pe7q$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <530lqs$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: general3.asu.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Gary Coffman ([e-mail]) wrote:

: Only if we believe that refraction is done by wiggling charges. In fact,
: it is our friend Snell at work. Refraction occurs as

:                   angle = arcsin(sin(phi)/sqrt((u2*e2)/(u1*e1)))

: and is dependent only on angle of incidence (phi) and the difference in
: u and e for the two mediums at the refraction boundary. Works for light,
: and works for longer wave EM too. It doesn't matter that the ionosphere
: has free electrons (and dirt doesn't), what matters is that both of them
: have u and e different from uo and eo of free space (or ordinary air).

Refraction is typically done by wiggling charges. The macroscopic mu
and epsilon are derived as approximations to microscopic calculations
which are just the "wiggling" of charges. See, for example, J.D.
Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics, section 6.7, Derivation of the
Equations of Macroscopic Electromagnetism. Snell's law comes right out.
If you increase the frequency to X-rays, you quickly find that the
macroscopic calculations aren't good enough and you have to deal with
the correct underlying microscopic theory.

73 Kevin [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:56 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!news.bconnex.net!clicnet!news.clic.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!altitude!usenet
From: Madjid VE2GMI <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Kurt's rectangle
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 15:26:21 -0400
Organization: ORION Microsystems
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53ejh1$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <53imk3$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dynamicppp-111.hip.cam.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)

Roy Lewallen wrote:
>
> Gary, you'd better write to the government and tell 'em they better start
> over with NEC-4. I modeled a 1 meter diameter horizontal loop on 40 meters.
> I think you'll agree that for this small loop the magnetic field
> dominates in the near field. In free space its feedpoint impedance was
> 0.00488 + j189.8 ohms. Placed one meter above "average" ground
> (conductivity 5 mS/m, relative permittivity 13), the feedpoint
> resistance increased by more than a factor of 10, to 0.0561 ohms. Buried
> one meter in the ground, the feedpoint resistance was 54.3 ohms, and buried
> 10 meters it was 54.5 ohms. NEC-4 lets you choose the conductivity and
> permittivity of "free space", so I put it in "free space" and chose
> "average" ground constants. The result was a feedpoint resistance of 54.5
> ohms.
>
> Now, NEC doesn't ask how much water is in the soil, just the conductivity
> and permittivity. Do you suppose there should be a third specification for
> wetness, or do you think it's NEC that's all wet? The huge changes in
> feedpoint resistance show it sure thinks there's _some_ kind of interaction
> going on with the ground.
>
> Hm, if you're right and it's wrong, why don't we all bury our loops?

Was the loop isolated from the ground and is there a way to
specify that in NEC4?


PS: The subject should change to "Ground War" or maybe
    "Desert Sand" for Arizona Hams :)


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:58 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.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: Kurt's rectangle
Date: 13 Oct 1996 17:01:52 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 35
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <53rlc0$[e-mail]>
References: <53pe7q$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Gary,

Your posts sound pretty authorative but they unfortunately they are
incorrect.

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

>
>If what were happening were actually the wiggling of charges, the
>re-radiation would be isotropic. But it isn't. It follows Snell's
>law. If you can't explain why a wiggling charge would re-radiate
>at a preferential angle that just happens to coincide with Snell's
>law, you'll have to give up that idea of wiggling charges as
>reponsible for ionospheric refraction.

Sorry. Look closely and you'll see the re-radiation of fields from the
ionosphere is from charge movement (wiggling charges) if you get yourself
to move beyond Snell's law. Same in the dirt no matter what kitchen it was
microwaved in and whether it is baked clay stuffed with sand or even a
nice juicy pete moss roast.

Why do you think charges moved by a plane wave coming from one direction
would be re-radiated as an isotropic  source? Charges in the ionosphere
move in unison with the influence of charges moving in the antenna. As a
matter of fact, it is only the influence on other charges at a distance
that causes the thing we call an "electromagnetic wave", nothing really
goes up there and bends anyway.

One charge can "wiggle", and will "wiggle" and dance exactly in step to
the influence of charges a few inches or many million of miles away, so
will a million charges. We pretty well know the direction this will
happen, the effect is very predictable.

73, Tom


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:02:59 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!crusty.teleport.com!nntp0.teleport.com!ip-pdx16-21
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Kurt's rectangle
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 96 21:02:24 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <53rlau$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53ejh1$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <53imk3$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx16-21.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

I've been thinking a bit more about the topic we've been discussing here
and think Gary has a valid point worth pursuing. The following is
largely a repetition of what he said, in slightly different words:

Pure water is non-conductive at DC and has a high dielectric constant.
At RF, we find that it's lossy. So if we measure its effect on an
electromagnetic field, we account for its loss by calculating an
apparent conductivity. This conductivity is zero at DC but non-zero
at RF, and is frequency sensitive. Becuase the loss mechanism (as I
understand it) has to do with the polar water molecules attempting
to align with the field, it doesn't seem unreasonable to think that
the apparent conductivity might be different when interacting with
magnetic and electric fields -- perhaps very different. That is, if
we calculate an apparent conductivity for water based on its
interaction with a magnetic field, then do the same based on
its interaction with an electric field, would we get substantially
different values?

If so, NEC might actually need a field-sensitive parameter to
adequately describe ground characteristics, as I halfway jokingly
(and, my apology, somewhat sarcastically) suggested earlier.

Ground water contains dissolved salts, which does give it non-zero
DC conductivity. I expect this to behave more like a regular
conductor, and have about the same apparent value regardless of the
type of interacting field. This may (or may not) dominate the ground
conductivity and swamp any field-senstive effects.

I've posed this question to some of the NEC experts, and will post
what I find out.

I do disagree with Gary that a "conventional" conductor (e.g., water
with dissolved salts) won't interact with magnetic fields -- I'm
convinced that eddy currents will be induced and cause loss. But I
am open to the possibility that the apparent conductivity of pure
water might be lower when interacting with magnetic fields than
electric, and that ground might exhibit this effect to some extent.

I'd welcome comments from anyone who knows more about this topic.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:01 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!feed1.news.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] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Kurt's rectangle
Date: 12 Oct 1996 08:58:03 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 72
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <53o4kr$[e-mail]>
References: <53kjlu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

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

>Indeed. NEC is showing you what happens when you fully or partially
>embed your antenna in a dielectric with a different dielectric constant
>than free space. That doing such a thing should effect antenna feedpoint
>impedance, pattern, and resonant frequency, should not be a surprise at
>all. Snell's law is going to cause the pattern to be altered, and that's
>going to affect the antenna's impedance by changing the near fields
>returning to the antenna.

So just to be clear, you are saying when Roy moved the antenna NEAR the
ground and say the ten times impedance change, it was because he imbedded
it in a dielectric and Snell's law took over.

I would have thought it was ground conductivity and loss.

>>Hm, if you're right and it's wrong, why don't we all bury our loops?

>I'm right about loss mechanisms, and NEC is right about the effect
>of dielectrics. Where you may be going astray is in interpreting
>that change in impedance as representing a dissipative loss in the
>dielectric. It may or may not be so, depending on the nature of the
>dielectric and the loss mechanisms dominant in the particular
>dielectric. Go back and tell NEC that free space has the dielectric
>characteristic of mica and see what results it gives. Then try
>paraffin, PVC, wood, etc. Each will have an effect, but that
>effect doesn't necessarily represent a loss.

Hmmm. You seem to be saying when buried in the ground, the increase in
resistance is due to a change in directivity.

What was that change again? Roy wrote:

>I think you'll agree that for this small loop the magnetic field
>dominates in the near field. In free space its feedpoint impedance was
>0.00488 + j189.8 ohms. Placed one meter above "average" ground
>(conductivity 5 mS/m, relative permittivity 13), the feedpoint
>resistance increased by more than a factor of 10, to 0.0561 ohms. Buried
>one meter in the ground, the feedpoint resistance was 54.3 ohms, and
buried
>10 meters it was 54.5 ohms. NEC-4 lets you choose the conductivity and
>permittivity of "free space", so I put it in "free space" and chose
>"average" ground constants. The result was a feedpoint resistance of 54.5

>ohms.

So Roy used the conductivity of free space (I assume that's a pretty damn
good insulator) and average permittivity. Burying the loop made a real
part antenna terminal resistance change of over 11,000 times, and it went
UP not DOWN.

That means one of three things:

1.) Something was dissipating all the power. For example, I could do this
by placing another loop next to another lossy loop having large power
dissipation.

2.) The directivity became MUCH less pronounced. For example, I could
increase the feedpoint resistance slightly by coupling the loop to a
bigger volume of space by eliminating the nulls. The loop would radiate
up, down and all around equally. We could work China short path through
the earth with such a loop.

3.) The current in the loop was a small part ( 0.0095) of the current in
the system causing the radiation. I could do this by using the loop to
excite another conductor with such a low impedance that it carried over
100 amperes for every ampere in the loop.

Which one do I believe? I'll take number one for ten thousand dollars.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:02 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!crusty.teleport.com!nntp0.teleport.com!ip-pdx16-21
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Kurt's rectangle
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 96 21:17:18 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <53rm72$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <530lqs$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx16-21.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

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

>Only if we believe that refraction is done by wiggling charges. In fact,
>it is our friend Snell at work. Refraction occurs as
>
>                  angle = arcsin(sin(phi)/sqrt((u2*e2)/(u1*e1)))
>
>and is dependent only on angle of incidence (phi) and the difference in
>u and e for the two mediums at the refraction boundary. Works for light,
>and works for longer wave EM too.

In Kraus' _Antennas_, 2nd Edition, a formulas are given for reflection
coefficient (Eq. 1, p. 717, and 3, p. 718). These also involve only
permittivity (relative permeability is assumed to be unity). However, in
equation 4 on p. 718, he explains that the permittivity is a complex
quantity, which includes DC permittivity, frequency, _and conductivity_.

Your statement implies that the field from a vertical would be just as good
from a desert as from a salt water marsh (assuming a very good ground
system in both cases to reduce I^2R conductive ground losses). This simply
isn't the case, and Kraus' equations show why. These, by the way, are the
equations used by both NEC and MININEC for calculating reflection
coefficient.

> It doesn't matter that the ionosphere
>has free electrons (and dirt doesn't), what matters is that both of them
>have u and e different from uo and eo of free space (or ordinary air).

Certainly dirt has free electrons unless it's bone dry. Otherwise, how
could we ground our electrical systems? Kids: don't test this theory at
home by dropping the hair dryer into the bathtub.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:04 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!uwm.edu!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-lond.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!ifwtech.demon.co.uk!G3SEK
From: "Ian White, G3SEK" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Kurt's rectangle
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 08:06:46 +0100
Organization: IFW Technical Services
Lines: 71
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <53pe7q$[e-mail]> <53rlc0$[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 3.01 <9qI82xurdT5+zee3Wovwfh3yMs>

W8JI  Tom wrote in response to Gary KE4ZV:

>>If what were happening were actually the wiggling of charges, the
>>re-radiation would be isotropic. But it isn't. It follows Snell's
>>law. If you can't explain why a wiggling charge would re-radiate
>>at a preferential angle that just happens to coincide with Snell's
>>law, you'll have to give up that idea of wiggling charges as
>>reponsible for ionospheric refraction.
>
>Sorry. Look closely and you'll see the re-radiation of fields from the
>ionosphere is from charge movement (wiggling charges) if you get yourself
>to move beyond Snell's law.

When G3NAQ (a particle physicist) wrote the Propagation chapter for
'The VHF/UHF DX Book', we worked together on the explanation of
absorption/re-radiation/scattering/refraction/diffraction until we had a
non-mathematical explanation that even I could understand. We then ran
it past some more physicists as a "purity check".

These different propagation phenomena shade over continuously from one
into another. As conditions change, some become dominant and others
become undetectably small, but they don't suddenly "switch" on and off.
What I was looking for in the Propagation chapter of the book was a
common underlying physical explanation for all the propagation
phenomena, not only in the ionosphere but also in the troposphere.

There's some risk of distorting the message in this very brief summary
which focuses on ionospheric effects, but here goes anyway...

When an EM wave interacts with a charge, such as a free electron is the
ionosphere, the charge is displaced and it oscillates in a straight line
perpendicular to the wavefront and parallel to the plane of
polarization. A charge oscillating in a straight line will re-radiate,
giving up almost all the energy it is receiving. The radiation pattern
is not isotropic; it is the donut pattern of a very short (Hertzian)
dipole.

The whole wavefront sets very large numbers of electrons into
oscillation, and the re-radiated fields from all those electrons will
interact to create a new wavefront. This situation sounds horribly
complicated, but fortunately the electrons are not aware of this.
If there is no change in the propagating medium (in this case, no change
in electron density) the wavefront continues in a straight line. In
other words, re-radiation in everything except the forward direction
will cancel out. If there's a step change in the medium, the wavefront
is refracted according to Snell's Law.

A further complication is that it isn't your own personal ionosphere.
The electrons that you are using are also moving in sympathy with every
other EM wave in the universe, from VLF to daylight and beyond. Your EM
wave going into the ionosphere adds a vector component to the motion of
each electron. Across your whole wavefront, these components of the
electron motions resolve into your own personal refracted wave coming
out again. (I call that pretty good IMD performance!)

Change the wavelength, change the propagating medium, change the method
of interaction between waves and matter, and exactly the same results
apply to light in glass, radio waves in the troposphere etc. In
"underdense" medaa where there are not enough absorbing-reradiating
particles to reconstruct a coherent wavefront, the situation shades over
into scattering.

Of course it's lots more complicated than that, but AIUI that's the
basic explanation in terms of classical physics.



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] Sat Oct 19 10:03:08 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.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: Kurt's rectangle
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 08:05:32 -0700
Organization: none
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <53pe7q$[e-mail]> <53rlc0$[e-mail]> <[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)

Ian White, G3SEK wrote:
>
>
> A further complication is that it isn't your own personal ionosphere.
> The electrons that you are using are also moving in sympathy with every
> other EM wave in the universe, from VLF to daylight and beyond. Your EM
> wave going into the ionosphere adds a vector component to the motion of
> each electron. Across your whole wavefront, these components of the
> electron motions resolve into your own personal refracted wave coming
> out again. (I call that pretty good IMD performance!)
>

Intermodulation distortion in the ionosphere has been observed. I don't
have any references but I read it somewhere many years ago.

Bill W0IYH


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:11 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.magicnet.net!iag.net!newspump.sol.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.asu.edu!atkes
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Kurt's rectangle
Date: 15 Oct 1996 03:03:19 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 95
Message-ID: <53uutn$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53ejh1$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <53imk3$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <53rlau$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: general3.asu.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]


Roy Lewallen ([e-mail]) wrote:
: I've been thinking a bit more about the topic we've been discussing here
: and think Gary has a valid point worth pursuing. The following is
: largely a repetition of what he said, in slightly different words:

: Pure water is non-conductive at DC and has a high dielectric constant.
: At RF, we find that it's lossy. So if we measure its effect on an
: electromagnetic field, we account for its loss by calculating an
: apparent conductivity. This conductivity is zero at DC but non-zero
: at RF, and is frequency sensitive. Becuase the loss mechanism (as I
: understand it) has to do with the polar water molecules attempting
: to align with the field, it doesn't seem unreasonable to think that
: the apparent conductivity might be different when interacting with
: magnetic and electric fields -- perhaps very different. That is, if
: we calculate an apparent conductivity for water based on its
: interaction with a magnetic field, then do the same based on
: its interaction with an electric field, would we get substantially
: different values?

: If so, NEC might actually need a field-sensitive parameter to
: adequately describe ground characteristics, as I halfway jokingly
: (and, my apology, somewhat sarcastically) suggested earlier.

: Ground water contains dissolved salts, which does give it non-zero
: DC conductivity. I expect this to behave more like a regular
: conductor, and have about the same apparent value regardless of the
: type of interacting field. This may (or may not) dominate the ground
: conductivity and swamp any field-senstive effects.

: I've posed this question to some of the NEC experts, and will post
: what I find out.

This is not my field of expertise, but I know a little (which may be
dangerous).  This phenonmenon can happen, but not in pure water.

Dirt, water, or whatever is certainly linear for the kind of
calculations/measurements we are looking at here. Therefore,
Maxwell's equations are,

Curl H = J + j omega D
Curl E =  -j omega B

In general, for a local, linear material, we can write

[ E ] = [ e  rho ] [D]
[ H ]   [ rho' u ] [B]

where e is the dielectric tensor, u is the permeability tensor, rho and
rho' couple the D to H and B to E. e, u, rho, rho' define what is known
as the material matrix. All of these are complex and functions of
omega. rho and rho' are often zero, but, for example, media that are
optically active have nonzero rho and/or rho'. These are some of
the materials that rotate the plane of polarization.

The mechanism is that an electric field causes a motion of charge
in the molecule that then generates a magnetic field. This is
similar to what happens in water, except that in water, the rotation
of the charge is as likely to be one way as another. For example
in a diatomic (not water) liquid, you would just as likely
have molecules in either orientation:

    +======-    or -======+

where the + and - indicate the charges at the ends. Applying an E field
in the up direction will cause the left molecule to rotate clockwise,
and the right molecule to rotate counter clockwise. The generated
magnetic field averages to zero. So these molecules are not optically
active.

From Maxwell's equations above, you can derive Poyntings theorem and
this allows you to define the drive resistance and reactance. You get
the drive resistance is given by the radiation and the losses from the
real part of J dot E, ( the usual ohmic loss) imaginary part of E dot D
(the usual dielectric loss) and the imaginary part of H dot B (the
usual magnetic loss).  Only if the rho and rho' tensors above
are not zero do you get loss term that depends on both the product of
the E and H fields. So while it is physically possible, it isn't likely
in dirt.

: I do disagree with Gary that a "conventional" conductor (e.g., water
: with dissolved salts) won't interact with magnetic fields -- I'm
: convinced that eddy currents will be induced and cause loss. But I
: am open to the possibility that the apparent conductivity of pure
: water might be lower when interacting with magnetic fields than
: electric, and that ground might exhibit this effect to some extent.

You are correct.  A conventional conductor is well described by a
complex dielectric constant, or completely equivalently at a single
frequency, a real conductivity and a real dielectric constant. While
the loss is then given by sigma |E|^2 integrated over the material, an
oscillating magnetic field necessarily has an E field too, and has
loss from eddy currents.

73 Kevin [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:13 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-9.sprintlink.net!demos!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.asu.edu!atkes
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Kurt's rectangle
Date: 17 Oct 1996 01:17:12 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <5441eo$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53ejh1$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <53imk3$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <53rlau$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: general3.asu.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

I deleted a lot, to make my post reasonable size.

Gary Coffman ([e-mail]) wrote:
: I think that's a fair statement. Note that there's an instrument
: called a proton precession magnetometer which flips the spins of
: the hydrogen atoms in water. This is a different mechanism from
: the dipolar torque, which is electric field sensitive, and only
: works at a particular frequency. It is the basis for the MRI
: machines, however. I think this is very much a secondary effect
: compared to the effect of the electric field on the dipole moment
: however. The magnetic fields used in MRI are *huge*, but they
: don't seem to appreciably heat the patient.

The big magnetic fields are static fields that's why they don't heat
the patient. They cause the spin "up" protons and spin "down" protons
to have different energies. An applied rf field with the right
frequency to flip downs to ups are vice versa sees a resonance effect
when the frequency matches the energy difference.  Note this is a
nonlinear effect since it requires the interaction of two fields. This
resonance is needed to enhance the signal from the proton magnetic
moments. In normal ham radio conditions with a single field you won't
see this magnetic effect.

And on a somewhat different topic Gary writes:
: I think we can test this pretty easily. We can take a plastic bucket
: or a glass, and wind a coil around it. Fill the glass with distilled
: water and drive the coil with RF of a frequency where the coil is of
: an insignificant size with respect to a wavelength. If we measure a
: significant temperature rise in the water, we'll know the H field is
: interacting with it. We can add various amounts of salt and repeat the
: experiment.

This doesn't tell you that the H field "interacts" with the water.
The H field will have an accompanying E field, and you will not
be able to tell the difference between the heating from one or
the other. Actually, you can calculate the loss from the known
dielectric constant of water and its loss tangent and compare
that with your measurements. I would expect good agreement.
with your experiment and presumably you will not find any additional
loss.

A true magnetic loss mechanism would be due to torque on magnetic
moments like the proton spins in water. These effects in water
are tiny.

73 Kevin [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:15 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.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: Kurt's rectangle
Date: 17 Oct 1996 11:41:57 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 91
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <545k45$[e-mail]>
References: <5441eo$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Gary,

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

>works at a particular frequency. It is the basis for the MRI
>machines, however. I think this is very much a secondary effect
>compared to the effect of the electric field on the dipole moment
>however. The magnetic fields used in MRI are *huge*, but they
>don't seem to appreciably heat the patient.

Hold on now Gary. The HUGE fields in a MRI machine are static, they cause
no heating because they are used to align the charges, and then the RF
pulse comes along (VERY quickly) and "rings" them.

So the only time varying field is a VERY brief but intense pulse from the
RF generator. The reason there is no heating is because there is no high
average time-varying field.

On the other hand, diathermy works by time varying fields, and the MOST
EFFICIENT way to heat the patient is by magnetic coupling to the patient.
Electric field  coupling will burn the skin off before the tissue below
gets hot.

Measuring the ratio of electric to magnetic fields shows that when the
patient is near the applicator, the fileds very quickly assume the same
ratio. As soon as the field sampling probe is immersed in the tissue the
ratio of electric to magnetic fields becomes the same, regardless of the
type of source (a loop or a "capacitor" plate).

The fields actually starts to change above the tissue.

Your analogy to MRI is completely incorrect, and even disagrees with the
facts of diathermy.

By the way, as a side note, there has NEVER been a study that shows LF or
HF EM radiation is harmful (other than cooking) to cell growth. Everything
I've seen indicates RF is theraputic, except for some UHF and microwave
data (such as on unborn fetuses exposed to daily 900 MHz diathermy). The
FCC restrictions, and worry about HF exposure causing cancer, is a joke.
Everything I've seen indicates HF RF actually shrinks the size of tumors,
at least according to research labs I work with that investigating this
stuff on a daily basis!

>I think that ion migration is too slow an effect compared with
>the free electrons in a normal metal conductor to be a very significant
>conductor at RF frequencies. Realize that even in saturated brine the
>space between the ions is large, so their fields don't jostle each other
>the way free electrons do in a metal to conduct an RF current. There has
>to be some significant drift to allow conduction. This takes time, I
>think more time than is available in an RF cycle. However, the H-field
>will try to move these ions individually. This is much the same as
>with the dipolar torques in that it may generate heat by mechanical
>action. There are lots fewer ions in the solution than water molecules
>though, so this may not be very significant.

>I think we can test this pretty easily. We can take a plastic bucket
>or a glass, and wind a coil around it. Fill the glass with distilled
>water and drive the coil with RF of a frequency where the coil is of
>an insignificant size with respect to a wavelength. If we measure a
>significant temperature rise in the water, we'll know the H field is
>interacting with it. We can add various amounts of salt and repeat the
>experiment.
>
>Someone posted earlier that water can be used as a dummy load by
>putting two parallel probes into it and adjusting the spacing for
>a good SWR match. I'd suggest that this is primarily an E-field
>interaction if the probes are short compared to a wavelength. They
>are serving essentially as the two plates of a capacitor. We could
>repeat the experiment with this setup and measure temperature
>rise.

Sorry, there's no way to generate a magmnetic field without an
accompanying electric field. The test is meaningless.

>Our doubting Thomas
>has access to big HF amps, I suggest he try these tests and
>report back to us.

Please excuse this, but I've had it with your nasty personal comments
Gary. There's no need for little immature personal digs Gary, grow up. You
certainly must be out of grade school by now!

Even if your ego can't accept disagreement or not always being right, at
least be polite and non-personal. If you continue to be snide with me,
I'll let you have it right back via the same media.

Roy appoligized for being somewhat sarcastic to you, are you mature enough
to do the same?

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:17 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!iglou!iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: Ladder line / balun question
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services (1-800-436-4456)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <01bbb9bb$5f035f20$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 13:29:30 GMT
Lines: 64

Basically, when it comes to ladder line, tuners and baluns, almost
anything said is true because there are so many variables. The frequency
you operate the system on will determine your impedance at the
transmitter. On some bands, a 4:1 will work better and on others, a 1:1.
The bottom line here is to do whatever works. Just be sure your balun
isn't overheating and wasting all your power and as long as it tunes up ok
and doesn't wipe out everything with RF, who cares.

Current baluns work best when dealing with lower voltages. In your case, I
would stay away from them. I use a current balun on my loop but loops
don't have the super high voltage points you experience on a multiband
dipole



Rick Lapp ([e-mail]) wrote:
: I've received several opinions on baluins recently and wonder if you could
: give yours:

: My setup is an 80 mtr dipole fed with about 40 ft of ladder line connected
: presently
: to a homebrew 4:1 ferrite toroid balun.  A 25' length of RG-58 runs into
: the shack to
: a Drake MN2000 tuner (unbalance output only).  I use this antenna for all
: bands.

: I see conflicting data on whether a 4:1 or 1:1 balun should be used.  I've
: tried a 1:1 but
: seem to get better results with the 1:1.  Also, an antenna noise bridge
: shows that the
: impedance is closer to 50 ohms when using the 4:1.

: I tried using this antenna with the feedline going into the shack and the
: balun right at the
: tuner but exprerienced excessive RF on 20 meters (not surprising) into the
: computer,
: modem and tncs.  Putting the balun outside solved this problem.

: Radioworks sells baluns (Remote balun) specifically for this purpose and
: this is
: a 4:1 balun.  They tout this as a "current balun" although I have not found
: reference to
: a current balun in any of my engineering references.  I'm told there is an
: ARRL book
: on transmission lines that might have something?   Is it the winding method
: that makes
: it a current balun?

: Another question is:  Should it be possible to obtain a 1:1 SWR without a
: tuner using a
: perfectly cut dipole with the correct balun, fed with balanced ladder line?
:

: Is this antenna referred to as a "dipole fed with ladder line" or is it a
: "Zepp" center fed?

: Rick kc2fd
: [e-mail]




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


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:19 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!nntp.uio.no!sn.no!newsfeed.tip.net!news.jos.net!dos.canit.se!seunet!mn7.swip.net!mn6.swip.net!mn5.swip.net!news
From: Maude Schyffert <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ladder line / balun question
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 13:26:33 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb9bb$5f035f20$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup105-6-6.swipnet.se
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-User: ca371ac9c2b9db57d345c213928e7f29
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win16; I)
To: Rick Lapp <[e-mail]>

>
> My setup is an 80 mtr dipole fed with about 40 ft of ladder line connected
> presently
> to a homebrew 4:1 ferrite toroid balun.  A 25' length of RG-58 runs into
> the shack to
> a Drake MN2000 tuner (unbalance output only).  I use this antenna for all
> bands.
>


ARRL ANTENNA HANBOOK:

Seems to be a 'funny' antenna setup, where did you find that ??
All bands 80-40-30-20-17-15-12-10 ????

What imedance does you ladder have ??

with the rg58 and a 4:1 balun you have 200 Ohms, how long is the rg58 ??
does it act as a transformer or not ??.

The antenna has Zero current and infinite voltage at the ends, then you
can calculate back to the feed-point to see which impedance you should
have, if it's there, no problem, if not you will of course have SWR.

> Another question is:  Should it be possible to obtain a 1:1 SWR without a
> tuner using a
> perfectly cut dipole with the correct balun, fed with balanced ladder line?
>

Naturally a perfect antenna balanced fed gives no SWR, no need for the
tuner;; put the balun at top use no ladder, much more simple.

SM0BKZ


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:20 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.kei.com!news.texas.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-ana-24.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ladder line / balun question
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 09:35:39 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb9bb$5f035f20$[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)

Rick Lapp wrote:
> My setup is an 80 mtr dipole fed with about 40 ft of ladder line connected
> presently to a homebrew 4:1 ferrite toroid balun.  A 25' length of RG-58
> runs into the shack to a Drake MN2000 tuner (unbalance output only).  I use
> this antenna for all bands.

Hi Rick, I suggest you obtain a copy of EZNEC from [e-mail]
and model your antenna. EZNEC will indicate very close to what impedance
your balun is seeing and I guarantee you will be surprised at the range
you are asking your balun to work with. You'll see impedances like
1000+j1000 on one band and 4 ohms on another. Your 4:1 does a reasonable
job on the 1000+j1000 but tries to take the 4 ohms down to 1 ohm with
corresponding losses in the balun and tuner.

I gave up on a configuration like yours. My signal reports are much
better since I do the antenna tuning on the antenna side of the balun.
My 4:1 balun always sees a perfectly resistive 200 ohms on all bands
and my entire antenna system is super efficient. And I do it on all
bands with a single value of capacitance per band (no coils except
on 80m).

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


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:21 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!panix!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ptd.net!newsmaster
From: Stephen Dobak <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ladder line / balun question
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 21:20:41 -0400
Organization: ProLog - PenTeleData, Inc.
Lines: 63
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb9bb$5f035f20$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs4-12.sun.ptd.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (X11; I; Linux 2.0.0 i586)
To: Rick Lapp <[e-mail]>

Rick Lapp wrote:
>
> I've received several opinions on baluins recently and wonder if you could
> give yours:
>
> My setup is an 80 mtr dipole fed with about 40 ft of ladder line connected
> presently
> to a homebrew 4:1 ferrite toroid balun.  A 25' length of RG-58 runs into
> the shack to
> a Drake MN2000 tuner (unbalance output only).  I use this antenna for all
> bands.
>
> I see conflicting data on whether a 4:1 or 1:1 balun should be used.  I've
> tried a 1:1 but
> seem to get better results with the 1:1.  Also, an antenna noise bridge
> shows that the
> impedance is closer to 50 ohms when using the 4:1.
>
> I tried using this antenna with the feedline going into the shack and the
> balun right at the
> tuner but exprerienced excessive RF on 20 meters (not surprising) into the
> computer,
> modem and tncs.  Putting the balun outside solved this problem.
>
> Radioworks sells baluns (Remote balun) specifically for this purpose and
> this is
> a 4:1 balun.  They tout this as a "current balun" although I have not found
> reference to
> a current balun in any of my engineering references.  I'm told there is an
> ARRL book
> on transmission lines that might have something?   Is it the winding method
> that makes
> it a current balun?
>
> Another question is:  Should it be possible to obtain a 1:1 SWR without a
> tuner using a
> perfectly cut dipole with the correct balun, fed with balanced ladder line?
>
>
> Is this antenna referred to as a "dipole fed with ladder line" or is it a
> "Zepp" center fed?
>
> Rick kc2fd
> [e-mail]

Fine with your center fed zepp, since you dont have a 1-1 swr at your
feedpoint
you are using a tuned transmission line. You didnt state what the Z of
your ladder-line is so I will assume 450 ohms. A 1/4 wave of 450 is
62.32 feet at 3.75 MHZ. A 1/4 wave will invert the Z of the load and a
1/2 wave will reflect the termination Z at the far point. since you are
using a feed of ladder line a bit less that 1/4 wave you are inverting
the Z. example 50 ohm to a 450 ohm line (yes I know a 80 meter dipole at
40 feet is not 50 ohms but to make a point) 50 ohms 1/4 wave away you
can find 4050 ohms and 1/2 wave then 50 ohms again. What this says is
that you can select your desired Z by tapping at the app. point on your
ladder line.(The stub principle)  What I would do is to adjust the
length of your ladder line untill you get your lowest swr through the
4-1 balun and let it play
   Later :-)
--
Stephen Dobak
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:22 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.portal.ca!van-bc!n1van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!news-w.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!news.csd.net!usenet
From: Richard Kiefer <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Lightning Damage
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 20:24:15 -0700
Organization: Computer Systems Design Company
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <51cipi$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp07.csd.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 just put up a new tower and have installed a corona discharge gizmo on
the top to keepe a locally discharged volume around the top.  I am
operating on the theory that a leader will not be formed in the region
is continously drained.  The gizmo is one of those broom things with
many points made from some stainless steel welding rod.

Richard Kiefer, K0DK


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:23 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!EU.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!li.net!bbruhns
From: [e-mail] (Bob Bruhns)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Lightning Damage
Date: 15 Oct 1996 04:58:46 GMT
Organization: LI Net (Long Island Network)
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <53v5m6$[e-mail]>
References: <51cipi$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: linet01.li.net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Richard Kiefer ([e-mail]) wrote:
: I am operating on the theory that a leader will not be formed if
: the region is continously drained.  The gizmo is one of those broom
: things with many points made from some stainless steel welding rod.

  Richard, I can't claim to be an exper - but whether your theory is
right or not, I don't think the gizmos will hurt.  Someone pointed out
that lightning would certainly have discouraged our ancestors from sea
travel if St. Elmo's fire wasn't protecting them...  Their masts were
certainly the tallest thing around for miles.

  Bob Bruhns, WA3WDR, [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:25 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!news.icanect.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Terry Simonds)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Lightning Damage
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 13:27:35 GMT
Organization: Icanect
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <5480hs$[e-mail]>
References: <51cipi$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.142.166.24
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Richard Kiefer <[e-mail]> wrote:

->I just put up a new tower and have installed a corona discharge
gizmo on
->the top to keepe a locally discharged volume around the top.  I am
->operating on the theory that a leader will not be formed in the
region
->is continously drained.  The gizmo is one of those broom things with
->many points made from some stainless steel welding rod.

->Richard Kiefer, K0DK

Here are two sites that contain quite a lot of good information on
grounding
and lightning protection.

    http://www.powerclinic.com/examlist.htm     (mostly grounding)

    http://www.polyphaser.com   (grounding and protection. Read the
                                 newsletter issues that pertain to ham

                                 antenna/station protection)

Good stuff--

73 Terry/WB4FXD
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:25 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!news00.sunet.se!sunic!mn5.swip.net!news
From: Maude Schyffert <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Living near commercial station
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 08:49:28 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <53ua6d$[e-mail]> <53ufl5$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup121-6-16.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 3.0Gold (Win16; I)
To: Anthony Severdia <[e-mail]>

> >I live next to a commercial transmitting station, which transmits on
> >two bands (1060 AM and the FM broadcast band). I'm between
> >300 and 600 yards from their antennas. 300 yd. from the FM antenna,
> >and 600 yards from the AM array.

Make a trap for the AM frequency and put it at the antenna outlet of
your transceiver.

SM0BKZ


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:26 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!xmission!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Living near commercial station
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 21:04:10 GMT
Organization: XMission Internet (801 539 0900)
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <53ua6d$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc26.modem.xmission.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82


I live next to a commercial transmitting station, which transmits on
two bands (1060 AM and the FM broadcast band). I'm between
300 and 600 yards from their antennas. 300 yd. from the FM antenna,
and 600 yards from the AM array.

My questions is this: I'm planning on setting up my HF gear, and
wonder if my being this close will give me any trouble operating the
HF bands. I have no interference/trouble on 2m or 70cm bands.

tnx in advance!

73  de AB6GF/7

-=Dave=-



()~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~()
[]  The Flight Deck BBS   801.265.0333   Excalibur @ 28.8  []
[]                   [e-mail]                  []
()~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~()
Love is blind, and they say marrage is an instution, but who
wants to live in an instution for the blind?!?



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:27 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [e-mail](Anthony Severdia)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Living near commercial station
Date: 14 Oct 1996 22:42:45 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <53ufl5$[e-mail]>
References: <53ua6d$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ala-ca17-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Mon Oct 14  5:42:45 PM CDT 1996

In <53ua6d$[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>
>
>I live next to a commercial transmitting station, which transmits on
>two bands (1060 AM and the FM broadcast band). I'm between
>300 and 600 yards from their antennas. 300 yd. from the FM antenna,
>and 600 yards from the AM array.
>
>My questions is this: I'm planning on setting up my HF gear, and
>wonder if my being this close will give me any trouble operating the
>HF bands. I have no interference/trouble on 2m or 70cm bands.
>
>tnx in advance!
>
>73  de AB6GF/7

    From what you say, you appear to be OK on VHF and above but you
could have some difficulty with the AM harmonics, even though they're
not in ham bands.  Namely: there might be mixes with other AM stations
in the receiver or externally. (oxide detectors in guttering and
flaky ground bonding in house).

    I've chased the latter ad-infinitum.  There is no sure cure because
they may emminate from the house next-door.  My location is midway
between two 5 KW AMs which are separated by 2 miles.  Your luck may
be much better. <g>

    -=Tony=-    W6ANV   San Francisco


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:28 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!hearst.acc.Virginia.EDU!news.jmu.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (D.R. Fordham)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Living near commercial station
Date: 16 Oct 1996 21:39:57 GMT
Organization: James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA
Lines: 17
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <543knd$[e-mail]>
References: <53ua6d$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip41-79.pc.jmu.edu
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.8 (x86 32bit)

In article <53ua6d$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
I live next to a commercial transmitting station, which transmits on
>two bands (1060 AM and the FM broadcast band). I'm between
>300 and 600 yards from their antennas. 300 yd. from the FM antenna,
>and 600 yards from the AM array.
>My questions is this: I'm planning on setting up my HF gear, and
>wonder if my being this close will give me any trouble operating the
>HF bands. I have no interference/trouble on 2m or 70cm bands.

I had a close friend who lives about the same distance from a
similar tower in South Carolina.  The AM station uses something
like 25,000 watts, and the FM uses 50,000 watts.  He gets the
AM station beautifully on his telephone and stereo speakers, but
not on his HF ham radio!  Apparently they filter out the harmonics
and stuff, and the signal is just overloading the phone lines on
the fundamental frequency.  Good luck.



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:29 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!OzEmail!OzEmail-In!news
From: Charlie Bailey <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Log Periods
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 18:54:14 +1200
Organization: OzEmail Ltd - Australia
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <VA.0000001e.004050d7@LOCALNAME>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.21.25.104
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Newsreader: Virtual Access by Ashmount Research Ltd, http://www.ashmount.com

I'm looking for information regarding building Log Periodics.

I'm interested in designing a field expedient LPA, either Horizontall or
Vertically poliarized that I can build out of wire or whatever.

I'm looking at working in the HF band, anywhere between 2 and 30 megs.

*Any* information would be welcome.

Thanks folks - this NG makes interesting reading for someone who's a
professional but short on information resources.




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:30 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news-m01.ny.us.ibm.net!news-s01.ca.us.ibm.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]   (Jon Schmidt)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Log Periods
Date: 17 Oct 1996 13:42:27 GMT
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <545d43$[e-mail]>
References: <VA.0000001e.004050d7@LOCALNAME>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip166-72-107-136.ct.us.ibm.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <VA.0000001e.004050d7@LOCALNAME>, Charlie Bailey <[e-mail]> write
s:
>I'm looking for information regarding building Log Periodics.
>
>I'm interested in designing a field expedient LPA, either Horizontall or
>Vertically poliarized that I can build out of wire or whatever.
>
>I'm looking at working in the HF band, anywhere between 2 and 30 megs.
>
>*Any* information would be welcome.

You might want to consult the book "Log Periodic Antenna Design Handbook"
by Carl E Smith (editor), 1979.  It's available from:
    Carl E. Smith Electronics
    8200 Snowville Road
    Cleveland, Ohio 44141-3498
    [phone]
    $29.50 + $4.00 S&H within USA
It focuses on the design of horizontal log periodic dipole wire antennas
for HF.

You might also wish to look at the brochures from the manufacturers of
commercial log periodic HF wire antennas for ideas.  Two such companies
are the Granger division of Andrews Corp. [phone] and Technology
for Communications International (TCI) [phone].



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:31 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!not-for-mail
From: "robert warden" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: long boom quagi design
Date: 16 Oct 1996 20:15:06 GMT
Organization: HO
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <01bbbb9e$b7206100$0f7fb0cc@rwarden>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.176.127.15
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

Need  design for 24-26 foot boom quagis. Would like to stack 4 for EME.Also
need stacking and phasing info.


Bob  n4fpr         [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:31 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!winternet.com!news
From: Mark Brown <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: long boom quagi design
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 08:41:41 -0700
Organization: StarNet Communications, Inc
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbbb9e$b7206100$0f7fb0cc@rwarden>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.146.5.201
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; I)

robert warden wrote:
> Need  design for 24-26 foot boom quagis. Would like to stack 4 for EME.Also
need stacking and phasing info.

Hi Bob
     From what I have read in the various antenna handbooks a long boom
quagi is not going to perform any better than a conventional yagi. Try
the arrl antenna handbook or the vhf/uhf projects manual for antenna
designs & stacking distances.
     Phasing is very easily done with a 4 port power divider built from
1" square aluminum tubing that can be bought at any hardware store. If
you want more details on the power divider there is an article in the
microwave experimenters manual.
     Mark


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:33 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.uoregon.edu!mars.efn.org!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Dick Hughes)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: looking for advice, having poor performance out of a R-7
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 03:16:48 GMT
Organization: Oregon Public Networking
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <53rr8i$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dynip137.efn.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.299

On 13 Oct 1996 22:42:26 GMT, Peter Shintani <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>Hi:
>       I am using, unsuccessfully, a Cushcraft R-7 mounted about 5 meters above the

>ground. It is located at the eave of the house. I have a decent SWR on all of
 the 7 bands,
>but I am having trouble getting out. I am located in a low spot near a large
pond. In this
>type of location, would it be better to switch to a different type of antenna
 ?
>I seem to have trouble with high QRM levels, so would a change to a small hor
izontally,
>polarized antenna make a small or a large difference? Since my yard, in Tokyo
 is
>very, very tiny, I can  only possibly consider Butternut H5FV type of beam.
>Any commnets as to the Butternut's performance vs a R-7 would be greatly appr
eciated,
>especially, from anyone who has experience in using either at such a low elev
ation.
>
>PEter
>
>

Peter -

I think it is probably more the lousy band conditions than it is your
R-7.  My R-5, mounted about the same height has been the best vertical
I have ever used.  Be patient.

Dick Hughes - W6CCD


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:33 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.kddnet.ad.jp!sinfony-news!sonygw2!oskgw!news
From: Peter Shintani <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: looking for advice, having poor performance out of a R-7
Date: 13 Oct 1996 22:42:26 GMT
Organization: Sony Japan
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <53rr8i$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 43.2.3.28
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-2022-jp
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
X-URL: news:rec.radio.amateur.antenna

Hi:
        I am using, unsuccessfully, a Cushcraft R-7 mounted about 5 meters above the
ground. It is located at the eave of the house. I have a decent SWR on all of
the 7 bands,
but I am having trouble getting out. I am located in a low spot near a large p
ond. In this
type of location, would it be better to switch to a different type of antenna
?
I seem to have trouble with high QRM levels, so would a change to a small hori
zontally,
polarized antenna make a small or a large difference? Since my yard, in Tokyo
is
very, very tiny, I can  only possibly consider Butternut H5FV type of beam.
Any commnets as to the Butternut's performance vs a R-7 would be greatly appre
ciated,
especially, from anyone who has experience in using either at such a low eleva
tion.

PEter




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:34 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!hst1us.satlink.com!satlink!un3.satlink.com!speed!banana!banana!anibal
From: [e-mail] (anibal aguirre)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: micro strip help!!!
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 96 08:12:45 EDT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Lines: 13
X-Newsreader: Alamito Mail and News Manager (V2.0.4 for Waffle) (unregistered)

hi fiends:I need some info about micro-strip cellular antenas.
Does anybody know where I can find it???
Please replay by e-mail.
Any replay will be appreciated.

anibal

--
---
E-mail: [e-mail]
Buenos Aires - Argentina




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:35 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!hst1us.satlink.com!satlink!un3.satlink.com!speed!banana!banana!anibal
From: [e-mail] (Anibal Aguirre)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: micro-strip cellular antenna
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 96 01:51:59 EDT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Lines: 17
X-Newsreader: Alamito Mail and News Manager (V2.0.4 for Waffle) (unregistered)

hi friends:
I'm searching info about cellular antennas in micro-strip.
I would like to make an array of 2 or 4 pachts in 900Mhz.
Does anybody know where I can find some about this subject???
Any reply will be appreciated.
Please, if is possible replay by e-mail because I have some problems with
the newsgroup
connection.
tx's
anibal.
LU4DVJ
--
---
E-mail: [e-mail]
Buenos Aires - Argentina




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:36 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!hst1us.satlink.com!satlink!un3.satlink.com!speed!banana!banana!anibal
From: [e-mail] (anibal aguirre)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: micro-strip help!!!!
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 96 08:14:51 EDT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Lines: 14
X-Newsreader: Alamito Mail and News Manager (V2.0.4 for Waffle) (unregistered)

hi fiends:I need some info about micro-strip cellular antenas.
Does anybody know where I can find it???
Please replay by e-mail.
Any replay will be appreciated.

anibal

e-mail  [e-mail]
--
---
E-mail: [e-mail]
Buenos Aires - Argentina




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:37 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!enews.sgi.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!ix.netcom.com!news
From: Tom Montgomery <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Mil Air Antennas
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 15:42:53 -0700
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ple-ca6-01.ix.netcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu Oct 17  5:43:00 PM CDT 1996
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

I saw an ad in October's MT for a fellow that is selling aircraft blade
antennas for the 225-440 range. I am really interested in one of these
and was wondering if anyone  has purchased one, how best to mount, and
general comments. Also would like e-mail address of this fellow if
anyone has one. His name is Don....

Thanks very much..

Monty

[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:38 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!metro.atlanta.com!news.radio.org!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: mismatch between free-space and receiving dipole: seems unimportant
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <53a4r5$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 23:56:14 GMT
Lines: 70

In article <[e-mail]> Madjid VE2GMI <[e-mail]> writes:
>> Jason Williams-Lock wrote:
>>
>> But in my case, even though I have a 4:1 impedance mismatch between
>> free-space (376.7 ohms) and the receiving dipole (1506 ohms, or there
>> abouts), despite this, it seems to have no *noticeable* effect on the
>> reception whatsoever ?
>>
>> Can anyone explain this ? I know mismatches are important (and
>> *dangerous*) for transmitters but here we are only dealing with pico-watts
>> (pW), the power density (P=E*H) watts per square metre, or P=(E*E)/Zo,
>> where Zo is the intrinsic impedance of free-space.
>
>Impedance of free space is just an "artifact". It is in fact
>
>       sqrt(Mu0/Epsilon0) = 120.Pi = 376.7


It is an artifact in the same way that c is an artifact, IE it is
a fundamental relationship of nature. In fact the value for c in
vacuum is a result of Mu0 and Epsilon0. It is

 c = 1/sqrt(e0*u0)

That holds for the speed of light in any medium, given the particular
e and u values of that medium. That's because the speed of light must
always equal the frequency divided by the wave number (number of wavelengths)
and that length is dependent on the character of the medium, IE it is a
spatial relationship dependent on the permittivity and permeability of that
space.


>which is  appears as an impedance in calculation of the power density
>or Poynting vector at time t:
>
>       P = EH = E^2/(sqrt(mu/epsilon))
>
>but it does not really represents anything.


Well, you left out a bit. The vector is actually

   closed integral over S of E X H * dS

The space of integration is critical to the power represented by
the vector. The integral evaluates to the units

    (volts/meter)^2 * 1/(ohms*meter) * meter^3  = watt

Roy didn't allow for the space of integration to which he had to
couple his joke antenna. It is not enough that the feedline
impedance match that of space, it also has to match it *across*
the space of integration in order to have a matched coupling of
power to it. That's a spherical volume related to e, u, and f.
The critical volume for a match is 4*pi*(c/(2*f))^3, and since
c is 1/sqrt(e*u), the critical volume simplifies to

   1/2*(pi/(e^3/2 * u^3/2 * f^3))

For a frequency of 10 MHz, and free space, that evaluates to
42.32 m^3. Now I'm not saying *how* he's going to couple his
feedline to that volume. I'll leave that as an exercise for
the reader. :-)

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:39 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!feed1.news.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: mismatch between free-space and receiving dipole: seems unimportant
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 08:10:32 -0700
Organization: none
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <53a4r5$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[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)

If we deliver 1 watt to a perfect (lossless) antenna with an input
impedance of 75 ohms pure resistive and if it delivers all of that 1 watt
into the 377 ohm free space, then that antenna is exactly like an ideal
impedance matching transformer with a turns ratio of sqrt(377/75). There
is no mismatch loss, at least in this ideal example. The linear antenna
performs this impedance transformation.  The available antenna noise
power is that of the 377 ohms at some sky temperature and the 75 ohms is
at the same temperature and does not contribute any addional noise.

Bill W0IYH


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:40 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!pineapp
From: [e-mail] (Daniel Curry)
Subject: Re: mobile hf ant for semi?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Netcom-Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 13:56:03 GMT
Lines: 12
Sender: [e-mail]

tim ([e-mail]) wrote:
: i will be setting up a mobile hf rig in my truck. does anybody have any
: suggestions for an antenna. rig is capable of 10-160 meters with built
: in auto-tuner. truck is a kenworth t-800 conventional day cab and i pull
: a tank trailer. antenna will probably be mounted on back of cab. top off
: cab is about 9' high. thanks for any suggestions!
:                               73 tim n1xup
 I would suggest the DK-3 from W6AAQ. It tunes 10-80 without a antenna
tuner. From W6RRC you can get his info about adding a 160 coil to the
DK-3.
  The DK-3 from W6AAQ is $150.00, this includes shipping.



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:41 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!news.netkonect.net!knews.uk0.vbc.net!theplanet.net!dnamp.prestel.co.uk!Duncan
From: "Dr. Duncan Clark" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Modelling phased delta lopps
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 20:11:50 +0100
Organization: DNAmp Ltd.
Lines: 26
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: b97.modem.planet.internet.co.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 3.01 <$Rs$gOIdQ8uAcGIB$H6v0dp7K$>

Hi Folks,

I'm curious. Has anyone ever modelled of even uses phased delta loops in
either a triangle (ie 3 loops) or 4 in a square. Would either of these
be on any use. Could they be phased for gain/FB simlar to phased
verticals. I know one can phase 2 loops etc but three or four with this
pattern?


    *                              *        *

                    or

*       *                          *        *




Duncan
G4ELJ
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
A distraction is only a distraction if you pay attention to it.

Duncan Clark
GeneSys Ltd.
http://www.genesys.demon.co.uk


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:41 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!nntp.inet.fi!news.funet.fi!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!sunic!mn5.swip.net!news
From: Maude Schyffert <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Need : SWR Schematics
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 20:50:48 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <5431ca$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup89-4-11.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 3.01b1Gold (Win16; I)
To: Insight Insight <[e-mail]>

Insight Insight wrote:
>
> I need to find some info on building an swr. This will be used for the FM
> Radio band . Thanks.
>
> Insight
It will probably be much cheaper to by on at Rdio Schack, I guess you
mean a SWR-meter....or ????

SM0BKZ


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:43 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.csranet.com!usenet
From: Hal Rosser <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: need a 160m "compromise" antenna ???
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 09:56:30 -0700
Organization: CSRA Internet Services
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: line050.csranet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; I)

U might try a coil-loaded full wave horiz sky loop. I plan on trying it
myself soon, but can't give a report on it. i'll use either 2 or 4
loading coils. I've read that the sky-loop is a real good antenna.
i'll use the calculations from the "mini-quad" program of Hamcalc
(available on the arrl bbs) for the starting point, then go from there.
Have fun & 73's
Hal KT4QE
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:45 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.cybercomm.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Ron)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: need a 160m "compromise" antenna ???
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 16:03:41 GMT
Organization: CyberComm Online Services
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <53qcf6$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: sl-012.sl.cybercomm.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Floyd Lucas) wrote:

>I want to put up a 160 meter antenna but don't have much space. About 110 foo
t
>by 75 foot lot. Tried an end fed wire, didn't work that good. (lousy actually
)

>any ideas???

>thanks

Try the Double Size G5RV from Antennas West.  It should work well in
an Inverted V.
Another suggestion when trying to work on 160 in a limited space. Try
to get as much wire in the ground as you can.
I have (3) 6 foot ground pipes and (15) seventy foot 600 volt 14 AWG
PVC insulated wires about 3 to 4 inches under the grass.  I've worked
about 200 miles with 5/9 5/8 reports and over 1000 miles after the sun
goes down with 10 and 20 over S9 reports.
Before, I put in all the ground wires I was just getting down the
block HI HI if I was lucky.  Maybe 50 miles day and 200 iles night if
I was lucky.

Good Luck
Ron C.




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:45 1996
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 23:38:49 -0400
From: "Vernon J. Kunes, Jr" <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: need a 160m "compromise" antenna ???
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: default
Lines: 14
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!mr.net!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!news.paonline.com!news3.paonline.com!default

Hal Rosser wrote:
>
> U might try a coil-loaded full wave horiz sky loop. I plan on trying it
> myself soon, but can't give a report on it. i'll use either 2 or 4
> loading coils. I've read that the sky-loop is a real good antenna.
> i'll use the calculations from the "mini-quad" program of Hamcalc
> (available on the arrl bbs) for the starting point, then go from there.
> Have fun & 73's
> Hal KT4QE
> [e-mail]
Don't know much about coil loaded skyloop, but can attest to the fact
that the skyloop is a real good antenna. I run an 80 meter here and it
has been real good to me. Now if only 10 meters will open up so I can
try it there.....  73 de N2YZS   Vern


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:46 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.flinet.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Ken Thompson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Need Help Looking For A Doppler
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 20:46:46 GMT
Organization: Florida Internet Corp
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <548g6n$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wpb48.flinet.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

please post plans for a doppler scanner antenna!!???!




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:47 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!enews.sgi.com!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: Need Help Looking For A Doppler
Date: 18 Oct 1996 23:17:12 GMT
Organization: Rocky Mountain Internet - (800) 900-RMII
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <54935o$[e-mail]>
References: <548g6n$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rainbow.rmii.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Ken Thompson ([e-mail]) wrote:
: please post plans for a doppler scanner antenna!!???!

I have no plans at this time.....


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:48 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newshub.csu.net!newsserver.sdsc.edu!news.cerf.net!ent-img.com!wb6hqk!bart
From: [e-mail] (Bart Rowlett)
Subject: Re: Need info on screwdriver antennas
Organization: wb6hqk
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <533vdb$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <53gt4i$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 02:47:44 GMT
Lines: 51

In article <53gt4i$[e-mail]>,
>In article <5370ql$[e-mail]> bob puharic, [e-mail] writes:
>

>I don't get very clear resonances in the 6-14 mhz
>range, but I can tune it to 80 meters ok, and follow the swr dip up to
>about 6 mhz - then it just kind of goes away.

How are you determining resonance?  It sounds like the distributed capacitance
of the coil is creating a parallel resonance of the loading coil near where
you are trying to tune the antenna.  The resulting impedance vs frequency
characteristic  will resemble that of a quartz crystal with two resonances
separated by an amount determined by the ratio of the series and undesirable
shunt capacitances.

The lower resonance is the desired series mode and the higher one is where
the loading coil is operating essentially as a trap and is probably fairly
lossy.  I have heard some of the 'screwdriver' antennas tend to burn up
when running more than a few hundred watts on 40 meters.  That could be
explained by the existence of such a self resonant mode.  You might try
insulating the base and checking for self resonance with a grid dip meter
if you can find one.

>Also have a strange
>resonance at about 12 mhz that doesn't move when I slide the coil in and
>out.

Again, how are you determining resonance?  The fixed resonance could be
a consequence of your measuring scheme and not the antenna itself.  For
example, it might be the self resonance of the transmission line and
magnetizing inductance of the base matching transformer.

>
>And here's another question that I've been thinking about. If I cut the
>whip short enough to tune up to 24-28 mhz, it will be short for 40 (less
>efficient than a longer one) and really short for 80, might not even tune
>there. I could put on a long whip for 80/40, but I won't be able to get
>up on the higher frequencies. Is it possible to put two whips on
>(actually thinking about a short whip, and a longer wire forward) ala the
>spider style antennas with the multiple whips? At the low end of the
>frequency range, the long wire and a moderate amount of coil would
>resonate. At the high end, the shorter whip and very little or no coil
>would resonate. Any reason this wouldn't work?

Yep, it shouldn't work.  There is nothing to separate the two
resonant modes (at HF anyhow) and the capacitance of the two whips will
combine to give a slight top hat effect.  The spider antenna has separate
coils and whips.


bart   wb6hqk


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:50 1996
Path: news1.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] (Bruce E. Chadwick)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: New to HF
Date: 18 Oct 96 19:14:18 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

I am brand new to HF other than what I had to learn to pass the tests.
I have just acquired a IC-706 and a MFJ 941 tuner with a dipole 160-10
mtr antenna.
The antenna has (actually had, I cut it) 100 ft of ladder line (450ohm)
and 70 ft of total length.  It has two coils in it to shorten it.

I attached the antenna to a five foot fence and cannot get it tuned.
I realize I need to get it off the ground and I am going to put it up
about 15 ft.  My real question is, according to
the ARRL antenna book it is ok to shorten the ladder line on a balanced
dipole.  The directions
with the antenna said to shorten it no more than 10-15 ft.  Any comments
on that?
Another item.  How sensitive is ladder line to wooden objects and
plaster board?  I have it coming into my garage, across the ceiling, and
to my tuner.
Another question (last one).  Anyone have a MFJ941?  It has three red
connectors on the back for wire antennas.  above the top two it says
balanced line and the third has a dotted line from one of the first and
is directly below the first.  I get different receive strength depending
on how I hook it up.  Anyone have a manual or advice for this?

Thanks for any help you have to offer.
Bruce, KB7CFL
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:51 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.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: Newbie AM Antenna question
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 15:46:10 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb6c7$620718c0$080a6acf@billclar>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup121-4-5.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 3.0Gold (Win16; I)
To: William Kapp Clark <[e-mail]>

William Kapp Clark wrote:
>
> I need to build/acquire an antenna to pick up distant AM, from Philadelphia
> to Cincinatti, frequency 1530 KHZ.
> ..
> Is it possible to improve the signal I currently receive using the built-in
> antenna of my Yamaha receiver ? Is it wworth it ? I record the program at
> night, and sometimes, the noise completely washes the signal out. The
> internal antenna is at ground level.
> ..
> Any help would be appreciated, or, perhaps a referenct to a FAQ.

Should it be possible to receive that station at daytime ??,
Depending on power (ERP) the effective range is 100-200 miles.
Next question, are there any nearby stions creation disturbance ??

If your in range and do not have QRM a random length wire would help a
lot, or an active antenna would also be good.

SM0BKZ


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:52 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!news.bconnex.net!clicnet!news.clic.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!altitude!usenet
From: Madjid VE2GMI <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Newbie AM Antenna question
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 15:40:22 -0400
Organization: ORION Microsystems
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb6c7$620718c0$080a6acf@billclar>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dynamicppp-111.hip.cam.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)

William Kapp Clark wrote:
>
> I need to build/acquire an antenna to pick up distant AM, from Philadelphia
> to Cincinatti, frequency 1530 KHZ.
> ..
> Is it possible to improve the signal I currently receive using the built-in
> antenna of my Yamaha receiver ? Is it wworth it ? I record the program at
> night, and sometimes, the noise completely washes the signal out. The
> internal antenna is at ground level.
> ..
> Any help would be appreciated, or, perhaps a referenct to a FAQ.

I have seen years ago when the first transistor radio came out
a "SWL gizmo" used to improve AM reception.

It was a rectangular frame a little bit bigger than the radio in
which you are supposed to put the radio made of cardboard, light
plywood, etc.. 1 to 2 inches wide.

Around that frame you wind a number of loops which enamel wire
and connect that to a variable capacitor (BCL type) to resonate
at the receiving frequency. THERE ARE NO CONNECTIONS TO THE RADIO!

The gizmo  works as a rectangular loop antenna (again) and by
the magnetic coupling to the ferrite rod inside the radio
will improve reception. The antenna is "tuned" by the Var. Cap.

Madjid, VE2GMI

I never tested the gizmo, try it at your own risk :)


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:52 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!uwm.edu!omnifest.uwm.edu!omnifest.uwm.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Rick Kissell)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Newbie AM Antenna question
Date: 11 Oct 1996 21:43:08 -0500
Organization: Omnifest
Lines: 4
Distribution: na
Message-ID: <53n0js$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.70.58

Why not just buy a G.E. Superradio III?  They're only 40 bucks from Brown
Brothers in Chicago.

Rick WB9GYT


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:54 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-3.sprintlink.net!news1.sunbelt.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jerry Flanders)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Newbie AM Antenna question
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 20:15:26 GMT
Organization: Info Avenue INTERNET Access
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <548obe$[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb6c7$620718c0$080a6acf@billclar>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ags-r2-p11.groupz.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

"William Kapp Clark" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>I need to build/acquire an antenna to pick up distant AM, from Philadelphia
>to Cincinatti, frequency 1530 KHZ.
>..
>Is it possible to improve the signal I currently receive using the built-in
>antenna of my Yamaha receiver ? Is it wworth it ? I record the program at
>night, and sometimes, the noise completely washes the signal out. The
>internal antenna is at ground level.
>..
>Any help would be appreciated, or, perhaps a referenct to a FAQ.

>Many Thanks

>[e-mail]
==========================================================================
Try turning the radio around while listening and/or tilting it
slightly vertical. This will change the orientation of your built-in
loop antenna and should have some effect.

If going all-out for a good listening setup, consider some
high-powered aids: During the short time I owned a JPS ANC-4 "noise
canceller", I discovered that it was very effective at "phasing out"
AM broadcast band interference from competing stations in different
directions. I was able to select from among two different broadcast
stations on the same frequency by "nulling out" the unwanted one with
the ANC-4, even if the undesired one was much stronger.

The ANC-4 did not solve my noise problem on the ham band (I had power
line noise from several directions, apparently), so I sent it back,
but the above AM broadcast phasing discrimination was very effective.

Jerry W4UKU



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:58 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!ott.istar!istar.net!tor.istar!east.istar!ftn.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Hugh Duff)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Outbacker..any good ?
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 18:23:18 GMT
Organization: ICA Canada
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <545tbv$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.112.2.39
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

I have the opportunity to buy an Outbacker Jr. antenna at a good
price.  Wondering if they are as good as they are cracked up to be in
the ads. This one is the 4 foot/ 8 band version.
I currently use hamsticks for the mobile HF installation.
Wondering if I might realize any perfomance improvements beyond the
convenience of the single stick Outbacker.

Thanks, Hugh  VA3TO




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:03:59 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [e-mail](Gerald Schmitt )
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Outbacker..any good ?
Date: 18 Oct 1996 00:13:19 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <546i2v$[e-mail]>
References: <545tbv$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sfe-nm3-24.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu Oct 17  7:13:19 PM CDT 1996

In <545tbv$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Hugh Duff) writes:
>
>I have the opportunity to buy an Outbacker Jr. antenna at a good
>price.  Wondering if they are as good as they are cracked up to be in
>the ads. This one is the 4 foot/ 8 band version.
>I currently use hamsticks for the mobile HF installation.
>Wondering if I might realize any perfomance improvements beyond the
>convenience of the single stick Outbacker.
>
>Thanks, Hugh  VA3TO
>
>

I don't think you will see any improvement except ease of use. My Perth
works OK on 20 and above but sucks on 75. I also found it needs tuning
to be resonant. I made some little trim wires that plug into other band
plugs to accomplish this. My bugcatcher works much better. The
Outbacker goes on trips along with the IC-706 though.

                        73 Jerry



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:00 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: Wayne Price <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Outbacker..any good ?
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 23:36:28 -0700
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <545tbv$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 239.san-francisco-008.ca.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)

Hugh Duff wrote:
>
> I have the opportunity to buy an Outbacker Jr. antenna at a good
> price.  Wondering if they are as good as they are cracked up to be in
> the ads. This one is the 4 foot/ 8 band version.
> I currently use hamsticks for the mobile HF installation.
> Wondering if I might realize any perfomance improvements beyond the
> convenience of the single stick Outbacker.
>
> Thanks, Hugh  VA3TO

In my experience, the Outbacker is a convenient antenna, but not
terribly efficient.  "Bugcatchers" etc. work better, but are taller.
The dead giveaway on Outbacker efficiency is that it is a short antenna
that matches 50 ohms relatively well.

--Wayne  W5GIE in Redlands, CA


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:01 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!coopnews.coop.net!super.zippo.com!zdc!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: quadrifilar antenne design
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 23:27:57 -0700
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 96.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Antoon Milatz wrote:
>
> To receive wheater satellites on 137 MHz I want to build a quadrafilar
> antenne.
> Does anyone has experience with this antenne ?
> Are there any schematics around ?
>
> -- Antoon PA3BWE


altavoz :

Why 137 mhz at 40 khz I.F. width ?

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:02 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: The Colliver's <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: R7000 Cushcraft Opinions
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 22:30:37 -0400
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 13.chicago-033.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; I)

I am looking for users and opinions of the Cushcraft R7000 40-10m
vertical.  I have an opportunity to get one, and would like to know if
your use has been positive.
I have checked out the web site, read up on it, and now look for
practical comments to lean me either way.
Thanks,
Chris KB8UXV


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:02 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.orst.edu!osshe.edu!internet!oconneld
From: Dan O'Connell <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Radiation pattern of inverted vee for 6 meters?
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 10:16:17 -0700
Organization: Oregon State System of Higher Education
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.95.961017101455.32169A-100000@internet>
References: <545eeu$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: internet.oit.osshe.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Sender: oconneld@internet
In-Reply-To: <545eeu$[e-mail]>



On 17 Oct 1996 [e-mail] wrote:

> I'd like to try an inverted vee for 6 meters in hopes of getting
> omnidirectional coverage.  This would be up around 30 feet and
> have an angle of 90 degrees.  My inverted vee for HF, according
> to the ARRL Antenna Book, supposedly has an almost omnidirectional
> pattern, especially at 80 meters--I wonder if I can get coverage
> off the ends of a 6 meter inverted vee.  Thanks for your advice.
> --Bill Ruth KB8USZ  [e-mail] (not speaking for
> my employer)

  If you prefer omni for 6, I suggest you make a J-Pole, or 1/4 vert.
better antennas, and pattern. Dan WA7TDZ



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:03 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.oberlin.edu!alpha.cc.oberlin.edu!PRUTH
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Radiation pattern of inverted vee for 6 meters?
Date: 17 Oct 1996 14:05:18 GMT
Organization: Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <545eeu$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: alpha.cc.oberlin.edu

I'd like to try an inverted vee for 6 meters in hopes of getting
omnidirectional coverage.  This would be up around 30 feet and
have an angle of 90 degrees.  My inverted vee for HF, according
to the ARRL Antenna Book, supposedly has an almost omnidirectional
pattern, especially at 80 meters--I wonder if I can get coverage
off the ends of a 6 meter inverted vee.  Thanks for your advice.
--Bill Ruth KB8USZ  [e-mail] (not speaking for
my employer)


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:04 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!uwm.edu!newsspool.doit.wisc.edu!night.primate.wisc.edu!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!news.vcd.hp.com!news
From: Don Huff <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Radiation pattern of inverted vee for 6 meters?
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 12:01:35 -0700
Organization: Hewlett-Packard
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <545eeu$[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)

[e-mail] wrote:
>
> I'd like to try an inverted vee for 6 meters in hopes of getting
> omnidirectional coverage.  This would be up around 30 feet and
> have an angle of 90 degrees.  My inverted vee for HF, according
> to the ARRL Antenna Book, supposedly has an almost omnidirectional
> pattern, especially at 80 meters--I wonder if I can get coverage
> off the ends of a 6 meter inverted vee.  Thanks for your advice.
> --Bill Ruth KB8USZ  [e-mail] (not speaking for
> my employer)

 Hi Bill OM,

  For six meters, a half wave is only about 9.8 ft long.   A quarter
wave is only 4.9 feet.  Why not just build a simple ground plane
out of wire or tubing, if you want vertical polarization?  For
horizontal polarization, a simple turnstile will give you an omni
pattern.  It is just two halfwave dipole oriented quadrature (right
angles to each other) and fed 90 deg out of phase.  See any ARRL
handbook.

   73, GL,
            Don, W6JL


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:05 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.iglobal.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!ionews.ionet.net!news-out.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!mr.net!newshub.tc.umn.edu!The-Star.honeywell.com!usenet
From: Carl Estey <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Revised element Lengths for Cushcraft 3219?
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 13:54:51 -0600
Organization: Honeywell News Distribution Server
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: md05c183.resd.honeywell.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win95; I; 16bit)

My 3219 Cushcraft "boomer" gave good service for many years ... until we
moved and the movers looked at the pile of aluminum as junk.  And sadly,
that is what it became.

Now I am ready to put it up again, so I ordered replacement elements from
Cushcraft. Since I see that this antenna is no longer manufactured, it
makes me wonder if it has been replaced by something better and if there
are changes in element length and spacing I should be making as I rebuild
it.

Do you have any proven mods to the Cushcraft 3219?  Let me know, please.

Carl Estey WA0CQG
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:06 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.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] (BillV21572)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: RFI help: smoke detectors!
Date: 18 Oct 1996 14:39:51 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 19
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <548itn$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (BillV21572)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hello all,

My latest problem:  my smoke detectors go off when I key my amplifier!!!
Here's the story - When I key my amp (~650 watts out), the interconnected,
hardwired smoke detectors in my house all go off with each dah (not the
shorter dits).  This doesn't happen when I key my transceiver alone (~100
watts out.)  The wiring from one detector to another parallels my coax
feedline for about 30 feet.   Also, one of the detectors is about 6 feet
from the twinlead feedline portion of my Windom.  I'm presuming that
either the higher power in the coax is inducing a current in the parallel
wiring, or the rf off my radiating feedline is inducing a current in the
wiring, signalling the other detectors that one has gone off.  It sounds
to me like I need an rf choke, to prevent the pickup of these currents.
Could I make one from several coils of its' house wiring?  Should I place
one at each smoke detector?  Any and all advice appreciated - the wife
says this is intolerable!!!
73 de Bill

Bill Vanstralen  KA9HLN  St. Paul, MN  [phone]  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:08 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.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: Roof mounted tribander
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 15:50:16 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <53iome$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup121-4-5.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 3.0Gold (Win16; I)
To: Ignacy Misztal <[e-mail]>

Ignacy Misztal wrote:
>
> I would like to put up a light tribander, such as A3S.  Because the
> house in on a slope, and I can erect the tower only on the lower side,
> a 40 ft ground-set tower would be at the same height as a 10 ft roof
> tower.  Also, trees prohibit puting the ground-set tower far away from
> the house.  Therefore I set my mind on a roof tower.  Has anyone have
> experience with such towers holding a tribander?  Is roof
> reinforcement necessary?
Shouldn't be, roof should hold some 200 lbs/squarefeet.

 Any horror or good stories?  A roof tower
> can easily cost $200.  Is a TV roof mount sufficient?
Could be, I don't know the antenna but a small triband is OK, just use
some guywires
 Is thrust
> bearing needed?
Could be good to have.
Would a brick-chimney mount be preferable from roof
If the antenna is guyed, no problem with a tv-pole.

SM0BKZ

> mount?


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:08 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!news3.agis.net!agis!newshost.cyberramp.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Paul Bates)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Rotor and control Box
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 20:37:23 GMT
Organization: CyberRamp.net, Dallas, TX [phone]/[phone] for info
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <540lnk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm2-14.cyberramp.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

I am looking for Telex or Hygain Rotors and control boxes that are not
working.. If you have any info please send me E-mail at
[e-mail]. I will pay good prices..



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:10 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!ix.netcom.com!irv-ca6-15.ix.netcom.com!user
From: [e-mail] (mg)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: ScoutRadio JOTA
Date: 18 Oct 1996 02:32:27 GMT
Organization: Myriad Design Associates
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: irv-ca6-15.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu Oct 17  9:32:27 PM CDT 1996

JOTA STATION
K2BSA
SCOUTRADIO TROOP 319
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA USA

SCOUTRADIO JOTA
Location: Camp Pendleton Marine Base in San Diego County California USA
Scouts participating: 375
Callsign: K2BSA/6 (Offical US historical call sign of Boy Scouts of America)
Frequencies: 14.290, 7.090 MHz, 21.360 MHz (see http address for all freq
& regs)
Date: October 19, 1996
Operating Times: 17:00 UTC- 24:00 UTC
Radios: 3 hf; 1 vhf;
Antenna: 2- G5RV; 1 Butternut vertical
QSL : K2BSA c/o KO6TF Mel Goldberg, 8341 Hurstwell Drive, Huntington
Beach, CA 92646 (SASE)
 Special  certificate showing scout lashed lodgepole tower.

NEW NEW NEW!! Internet/Packet:  packet tied  to internet to arrange sked
on a realtime basis.
Our email address via packet from ScoutRadio's Station is
([e-mail]). If you hear us on radio and want to
arrange a sked, send us a email. It takes about 1-2 hours to make it into
our packet from your internet email.

Hope to hear you on the air!

DETAIL JOTA INFO
For offical JOTA rules and information copy our info page at ScoutRadio
address to your browser....
http://www.ocbsa.org/units/pacifica/troop319/319jota.htm

SCOUTRADIO GOAL
Over 250,000 áScout & Scouter Hams Worldwide! ScoutRadio is a "good turn
project" of Boy Scout Troop 319, Huntington Beach, California USA. Our
goal is to promote amateur radio in Scouting. Service to our communities
worldwide as hams & Scouts/Scouters with disaster, emergency and
humanitarian relief communications.

Mel Goldberg KO6TF
ASM Troop 319 & Webmaster Advisor
[e-mail]
http://www.ocbsa.org/units/pacifica/troop319/ham.htm


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:11 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.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: Shortened Dipole
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 15:55:56 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup121-4-5.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 3.0Gold (Win16; I)

EFL wrote:
>
> I'm trying to put an 80m shortened dipole inside my attic to go along
> with the 40m.  The dipole is fed from a balun & each side is 20'6" from
> the balun to the trap and then about 15' to the end.  Total length is
> almost 70'.  I know that I can fold it like a "z", however, will it work
> if I fold it like the symbol of a resistor \/\T/\/\B/\/\T/\/ B=Balun,
> T=Trap or a similar fold.  How about folding it back on itself? Finally,
> how about straight on one leg and folded on the other?  Any help would be
> greatly appreciated.

Well anything will work, just cut and try, a good antenna
impedancd-meter and a SWR-meter is good to have. When it comes to
antennas is size if importance, small antennas are not as good as bigger
even if SWR...etc.. is OK. An 80 m mobile whip has about 1 % effecincy.

SM0BKZ


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:12 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!idir.net!news
From: Steve Cooper <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Snow/Ice loading on Beam/Quad
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 08:31:14 -0500
Organization: Internet Direct Communications
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm2_07.computer-services.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01Gold (Win95; I)

I am interested in finding out how well some of the yagi's or Quad's from majo
r manufacturers survive a hard
winter. I am from Kansas, and though we don't have as hard a winter as some of
 the more northern states, Ice
loading can be a problem. I may be getting the opportunity to put up a Tower s
oon, so what kind of experiences
have other hams had with getting their antenna system through a hard winter.

Steve Cooper   KD0UC
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:13 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.erols.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!hole.news.pipex.net!pipex!red.paston.co.uk!usenet
From: Paul Sergent <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur,:,rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.cb
Subject: solar panels
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 12:16:50 -0700
Organization: N.C.S.L. Business and Leisure
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: net36.paston.co.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win16; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29933 rec.radio.swap:91081 rec.radio.cb:36416

Page
htp://www.paston.co.uk/ncsl/business.html
will give you solar panel information


--
Paul SERGENT.   N.C.S.L. (Business & Leisure)
Tele. [phone] & [phone]
Fax. [phone].
:

 References:
            1



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:14 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!hole.news.pipex.net!pipex!bbc!news
From: [e-mail] (Paul Cort-Wright G3SEM)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Sommer TCS 25 &TCS 50 Antennas
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 14:13:08 GMT
Organization: BBC East
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <54064u$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 132.185.188.250
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82


        September QST page 151 carried an interesting advert for a terminated
frequency independent Vertical antenna ...by Sommer. along with a
layout  sketch  for a TCS 25 & TCS 50.

No traps /no loading coils / but with an interesting tuning line
        .
Covers [phone]-17-15-12-10

        Anyone got any ideas on how the thing works, and its efficiency?

        Or is it too good to be true!!!!

                                                        73 de G3SEM



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:15 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!en.com!news.dgsys.com!tahiti.netreach.net!chesco.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (the Johnsons)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Source for push up masts
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 04:11:12 GMT
Organization: Chester County Internet Services, Inc.
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <53hno6$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm3x25.chesco.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.equipment:40715 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30013

Kory Hamzeh <[e-mail]> 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,
        Rohn also makes a line of push-up masts, more rugged, heavier
galvanizing, higher price. Look much more rugged than radshack, but
sounds like your plans are a bit optimistic. 18 feet freestanding
above the eaves will not take much wind load. Would do better with a
HD flagpole or junk streetlight pole.
        Good luck, Greg K3EWZ



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:17 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.mindspring.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jim Sheffield)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Source for push up masts
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 16:21:55 GMT
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises, Inc.
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <540dtp$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <53hno6$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip7.austin14.tx.interramp.com
X-Server-Date: 15 Oct 1996 16:25:29 GMT
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.equipment:40756 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30048

[e-mail] (the Johnsons) wrote:

>Kory Hamzeh <[e-mail]> 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,
>       Rohn also makes a line of push-up masts, more rugged, heavier
>galvanizing, higher price. Look much more rugged than radshack, but
>sounds like your plans are a bit optimistic. 18 feet freestanding
>above the eaves will not take much wind load. Would do better with a
>HD flagpole or junk streetlight pole.
>       Good luck, Greg K3EWZ

Guys, I just bought the 50-foot Rohn telescoping mast, and
the price came in very close to the Radio Shack 40-foot model.
Mine easily supports a Mini-Quad (15 pounds) at 35 feet, with
support halfway up at the roof gable endwall.

Keep it light, and it will work fine.  You'll need one set of guys
with the setup you are contemplating.  I recommend drilling
through the mast at each joint and installing a through-bolt.
73, Jim, KB7ET
--




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:18 1996
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 04:00:34 -0400
From: "Vernon J. Kunes, Jr" <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: SPC tuner question
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: default
Lines: 10
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!news.paonline.com!news3.paonline.com!default

I recently acquired an old, homemade antenna tuner that seems to be a
SPC type tuner, and resembles the circuitry described in the current
ARRL antenna book in the article about building a SPC antenna tuner with
one difference: the double gang cap (with one gang in series and the
other gang in parallel with the inductor) is on the input side of the
transmatch, not the output side.
What affect will this have on the transmatch? I hope to acquire an
antenna analyzer very soon, and will see what that tells me, but in the
mean time, if anyone has some knowledge of these, I'd like to hear from
you. Thanks.  73 de N2YZS


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:19 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news3.cac.psu.edu!news.cse.psu.edu!news.cc.swarthmore.edu!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Barry Kutner)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: SWR High on Hygain TH7
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 20:39:45 GMT
Organization: Voicenet - Internet Access - [phone]
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <540vug$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ivyland316.voicenet.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Tom Whiteside <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Greetings and thanks for reading this.  I'm having a problem with a
>high SWR on a HYGAIN TH7DX.  I have a Cushcraft 40-2CD (40 meter 2
>element antenna mounted above the TH7 about 6 feet away and this may
>be the problem.  Readings are less than 1.5:1 for 10 meters up to abt
>29mhz so no problem with this band (seems to exhonerate the feedline).
>15 meters SWR is in the 2:1 to 2.5:1 across the band. 20 meters is
>worse and swr ranges from 2.3 to 3.5 with the upper part being worse.

>Readings do not vary with rotating the beams.  The Cushcraft SWR is
>textbook low.  I'm a fairly new ham and inexperienced with these things
>in general.  I did check with the ARRL tech consultant before doing this
>and he felt that 6 feet was enough distance.  It is possible that the
>Cushcraft has nothing to do with this.  I and another person triple
>checked the construction of the TH7 before hoisting it up there...

>I'd very much appreciate hearing from anyone who might have such an
>installation or with helpful thoughts on isolating the problem.  Thanks
>again for reading this.

>de AC5IB Tom

Tom - Since 15 m is an odd harmonic of 40 m, there will be
interaction. You should separate the 2 antennas by 10 ft at least.
73 Barry W2UP




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:20 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!news.larc.nasa.gov!night.primate.wisc.edu!newsspool.doit.wisc.edu!news.itis.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Joshua Daniels)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Tapped coil design Maxrad question
Date: 18 Oct 1996 23:34:48 GMT
Organization: UW-Madison
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <54946o$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: p21.itis.com
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.5

Hi-

I am using a maxrad mdb 1444 mobile antenna and I noticed something
which seems unintuitively strange:

I wanted to see if there was continuity between the center tab (where it
connects to the NMO for the center of the cable) and the whip.  No continuity.
Instead, there is continuity between the whip and the outer-ring (the part
that makes connection with the shield).  Is this the way a tapped coil
antenna should be?  Does anyone else have one of these?

thanx much,

Josh Daniels, N2JLL/9




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:21 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-in2.uu.net!news.maz.net!news.ppp.net!news.Hanse.DE!mwhh!dk3uz!ehramm
From: [e-mail] (Edmund H. Ramm)
Subject: Re: TCP/IP Network-ham Radio
X-Newsreader: nn 6.4.18
Followp-To: rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Private Linux/68k site
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <53g38r$[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 17:23:22 GMT
Lines: 15

[e-mail] (Alexandru Liviu Iruc) writes:

>        It's possible to conetc two or more computers over TCP/IP using Ham
>Radio fequences???

   Yes, and it is being done all the time. To do it, one, among other
things, needs to hold a license, though.

   Followed-Up to rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc ....

   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] Sat Oct 19 10:04:23 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.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] (K1BQT)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Tell me about OCF dipoles...
Date: 11 Oct 1996 18:38:46 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 31
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <53mi9m$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (K1BQT)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hi Larry--

OCF dipoles have their function--although I don't know if I'd build one
just for the sake of building one.  Off-center feed is usually employed as
a strategy to solve a particular design problem--or, in the case of the
"Windom" family of antennas, as an opportunity to introduce conditions
suitable for multi-band operation.

I've used the OCF approach mainly to match short portable dipoles
exhibiting a center feedpoint impedance below 50 Ohms at 75 and 20 meters.
 The 2-Meter Discpole antenna I described in Summer 1996 Communications
Quarterly is also a OCF dipole using capacitive loading.  Any time you
need to raise the feedpoint impedance of an antenna to match into your
feedline of choice, OCF is a useful strategy you can use to do it
(feedpoint impedance increases as you move the feedpoint off-center and
toward one end of the antenna).

No matter what type of OCF you make, you will probably have to use a balun
of some type to decouple the antenna from the feedline.  Since the two
legs of the antenna are no longer of equal length, you will lose any
natural cancellation of common-mode feedline currents that might otherwise
exist on a balanced radiator.  A choke type balun is usually adequate for
this purpose.  If you don't decouple the feedline, the antenna will try to
make the outside of the feed a third leg--and performance will deteriorate
rapidly.

Other than that, it is a useful technique--as long as you know exactly
what it is that you want to accomplish.

Rick -- K1BQT



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:23 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ptd.net!newsmaster
From: [e-mail] (alex)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: TELREX TB6EM NEED INFO
Date: 15 Oct 1996 03:50:08 GMT
Organization: Your Organization
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <53v1lg$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs1-01.blo.ptd.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.7

I just bought A TB6EM and I assembled it but I am not sure as to how 2
of the 6 elements should be placed and the info that I got with it is
limited so if antone has anything on it please E-Mail me
[e-mail]




                                                Tnx in advance N3OAP
                                                Alex



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:24 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.logical.net!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: test
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 23:00:47 GMT
Organization:
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <543pa4$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup057.qnsbny1.capital.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

test



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:25 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!news.cyberg8t.com!host61.cyberg8t.com!user
From: [e-mail] (Raymond Sarrio)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Test your antenna knowledge "answer the ham crossword puzzle!"
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 22:29:10 -0700
Organization: Raymond Sarrio Co.
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: host61.cyberg8t.com

What a fun way to test your antenna 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] Sat Oct 19 10:04:26 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!venus.sun.com!news2me.EBay.Sun.COM!newsworthy.West.Sun.COM!mandalay!aga
From: [e-mail] (Tony Angerame - Sun SSE)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: The idiot ham trade.
Date: 17 Oct 1996 23:41:03 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems Inc.
Lines: 3
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <546g6f$[e-mail]>
References: <53jh7v$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: mandalay.west.sun.com

OK OK one Commodore 64 for one Beach Bunny! Original Carton included.




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:27 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!dimensional.com!news.wizard.com !news.ici.net!news
From: "Mark N. Dumont" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Tower
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 13:13:36 -0400
Organization: Corporate Image Apparel, Inc.
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pmfr1ip5
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

I ordered a tower from US Tower 10-04-96 how long is the delivery
comming from someone who has ordered one in the past...I ordered a
TX-455.... Please reply

[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:27 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!ratty.wolfe.net!usenet
From: Rick Perry <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Towerless in Seattle??
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 20:19:07 -0700
Organization: Wolfe Internet Access, L.L.C.
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: yak2-ts1-p40.wolfenet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

To the person with the W51 FS in Spanaway, WA.  Lost info.  please
contact me. Rick,  KG7A   509-457-8943  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:29 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!spool.mu.edu!munnari.OZ.AU!metro!metro!manuel.ocs.mq.edu.au!news
From: Guy Fletcher <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: VHF Antenna Pictures
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 19:26:51 -0700
Organization: School of MPCE, Macquarie University
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kanangra.mpce.mq.edu.au
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; I)
CC: [e-mail]

I've been looking around the WWW for nice pictures of VHF
and UHF antennas, partly to see how they're put together
and partly just because I like looking at antennas.

Now you'd think that there would be hundreds out there!
Maybe there are, but I can't find them. There are lots
of nice pics of EME arrays of the 6x17 elements (on 2m)
sort of size, and their owners are rightly proud enough
of them to show them off.

But I would like to look at more modest arrays, the kind
of thing that a reasonably keen VHF-UHF enthusiast might
manage to get up, say 4x12 or 4x13 elements on 2m,
maybe with a 4-yagi bay for 70cm inside it.

Would anyone like to offer their own or other hams' web
addresses with nice antennas to look at? Email or on this
newsgroup, whatever you like!

Guy     VK2BBF  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:29 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!usenet
From: "Jeff Corey" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: w0b? Towers in Iowa - Need to Locate
Date: 14 Oct 1996 17:28:17 GMT
Organization: MCSNet Services
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <01bbb9f4$c8645d00$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: corey.pr.mcs.net
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

Hi, this is Jeff Corey WB9KAZ in Elgin, IL.

At Radio Expo on Sept 21 of this year, I purchased a PRO AM PA55 Dual band
vertical for 2m and 450.  I cant find the phone number for the company I
got it from , they were in the main building at EXPO, right when you come
in the front door.  W0BW Towers, I think.  Does anyone have their phone
number?

The antenna was factory fresh, but Pro Am refuses to warranty it , as it
has to go thru the dealer who sold it.

It is a model PA 55 , if anyone is familiar with it, let me know.  It reads
infinite VSWR, and I suspect a small cap inside that couples the middle pin
of the N connector to the gamma match coil.

If anyone can help, it would be appreciated.

73,

Jeff Corey
WB9KAZ
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:30 1996
Path: news1.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] (Mark K Flanagan)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Wall Mount Antenna Bracket
Date: 16 Oct 96 14:21:00 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

If your roof overhangs the side of you house by 27 inches your best bet
would
probably be to cut a small circular hole in the roof with a hole saw
where you want
the mast to pass through, just don't do it at the peak, offset it a foot
or so.  You
can then use commercial brackets, less expense, and have a higher load
and
most of all it will look a lot better.  A small cone made out of tin
around the mast
with some sealant will improve the looks.


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:31 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsgate.compuserve.com!ix.netcom.com!netcomsv!uu3news.netcom.com!flying!frisbie
From: [e-mail] (Alan Frisbie)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Wall-mount antenna bracket
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 15 Oct 96 11:30:25 PDT
Organization: Flying Disk Systems, Inc.
Lines: 13

I am trying to find an antenna mount that will allow me
to attach the pole to the side of my house.   The problem
is that the roof overhangs the side of the house by 27 inches.

I have found several that hold the pole 6, 12, or 18 inches
out from the wall, but none that come anywhere close to 27.
If I could find one for 24 inches, I could probably make
some 3" spacers, but anything more than that is asking for
trouble.   Does anyone make a wall mount that can clear a
27" (or even 24") roof overhang?

--  Alan E. Frisbie               [e-mail]
--  Flying Disk Systems, Inc.


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:33 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!dsm6.dsmnet.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Dean T. Miller)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Wall-mount antenna bracket
Date: 16 Oct 1996 01:54:30 GMT
Organization: Miller and Associates
Lines: 49
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: slppp06.dsmnet.com
X-Newsreader: OUI TE 1.5

Hi Alan,

In article <[e-mail]>, From
[e-mail] (Alan Frisbie), the following was written:
> I am trying to find an antenna mount that will allow me
> to attach the pole to the side of my house.   The problem
> is that the roof overhangs the side of the house by 27 inches.

Ha!  I sure do know that problem. :)

I'm in the process of doing exactly that, but it's pretty ugly looking
-- and I'm not too sure it will work well.

Here's what I'm doing (actually, I have it built but not 'installed'
yet).

I built a tripod out of 2" electrical (underground type) PVC tubing,
connectors and cement.  This stuff is heavier than water/sewer tubing
but still quite easy to work with.

The tripod has one leg horizontal (pushing against the wall) with two,
somewhat longer, legs spread about 3 feet apart and angled downward to
meet the wall.  Coming off the top, horizontal leg is a vertical section
to which I'll clamp the antenna.  That part's built.

Tomorrow (or when I find time) I'll install an anchor in the wall of the
house to which I attach a guy wire with turnbuckle to pull the tripod
against the house.  I'll see if I can draw this (use mono-spaced font to
view it). \ |\ | \
|  \ roof
|   \
|    \
|     \
|      \
|         |
|   leg   | vert post
|=========+
|---++----|
|  guy   /
|       /
|      /
|     / leg
|    /
|   /
|  /
|/

wall



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:33 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [e-mail](Mikel Bowlin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Wanted: C. Quad Plans
Date: 16 Oct 1996 12:22:32 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <542k28$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lap-ca2-09.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Wed Oct 16  5:22:32 AM PDT 1996

Apparently 73 Mag had a set of plans for this antenna. I would pay
copying fees and mailing for a copy of these plans. If you have pls
EMAIL me at this address. Mike KF6FLQ


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:34 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-in2.uu.net!news.icanect.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Terry Simonds)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WARC dipole addition
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 13:25:00 GMT
Organization: Icanect
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <5480d2$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.142.166.24
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Bob Lewis <[e-mail]> wrote:

->Anybody tried placing a 3-band WARC dipole above a 10/15/20
tribander
->(with 40 Meter driven element)?  Any reaction between beam and
dipole?
->How much separation?

I'm about to hang and tune a 40-17 "fan" dipole. I'll post results in
a few weeks, if it will ever stop raining here!


73 Terry/WB4FXD
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:35 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.pressenter.com!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: web page invitation
Date: 19 Oct 1996 01:24:56 GMT
Organization: PressEnter
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <549al8$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: asshur.pressenter.com

Hi,

Please stop by my webpage and check out my amateur radio section.  If you
have any link suggestions, please submit them.

Thank you
http://www.pressenter.com/~jruby/

#m3



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:35 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!usenet
From: Lou Petkus <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Where is Saxon Wire
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 09:50:38 -0700
Organization: MCSNet Services
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ljp.pr.mcs.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win95; I; 16bit)

Is Saxon Wire still in business?  If so, does anyone know their address
and phone number?


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:36 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-4.sprintlink.net!ratty.wolfe.net!usenet
From: Rick Perry <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Which Quad?
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 20:25:02 -0700
Organization: Wolfe Internet Access, L.L.C.
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: yak2-ts1-p40.wolfenet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Looking for recommendations on which quad to buy.  My interests are a 4
element 20 to 10 meters (5 band) model.  I come across two companies
Cubex and Lightning Bolt.  Some significant differences ie.  Sq ft.
Cubex 6.5 and Lightening Bolt 12 Sq ft., yet the Cubex weighs 66 lbs and
the LB weighs 60 lbs.  Really would like some comments from anyone with
knowledge about the Cubex, LB or any other.    I live in Eastern
Washington where we get snow (not too bad) and in extreme cases winds to
about 50 mph (rare).

Thank You,  Rick KG7A


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:37 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!buffnet2.buffnet.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] ([e-mail])
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WTB 7L12 Plug In
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 17:26:20 GMT
Organization: none
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <53l7q7$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dppp39.buffnet.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20126 rec.radio.amateur.misc:116319 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:40558 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29870

Hi,

Anybody know of any reasonably priced 7L12 Tek plug ins for sale??

Reply to [e-mail]

Thanks !!



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:38 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.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!main03!landisj
From: [e-mail] (Joe Landis)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WTB 7L12 Plug In
Message-ID: <1996Oct18.105628.654@main03>
Date: 18 Oct 96 10:56:28 EST
References: <53l7q7$[e-mail]>
Distribution: world
Organization: North American Drager - Telford, PA
Lines: 13
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20295 rec.radio.amateur.misc:116691 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:40852 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30128

In article <53l7q7$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (daveb@buffnet
.net) writes:
> Hi,
>
> Anybody know of any reasonably priced 7L12 Tek plug ins for sale??
> Reply to [e-mail]
> Thanks !!

Yeah, me too!

Joe - AA3GN
--
[e-mail] - speaking only for myself, of course
No, this is not a sig.


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:38 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!netnews.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: Tom Montgomery <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WTB: Diamond Discone
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 13:25:43 -0700
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: ple-ca11-18.ix.netcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-NETCOM-Date: Wed Oct 16  3:25:47 PM CDT 1996
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Want to Buy :    D-130J  25-1300 Wide Band Discone Antenna  in good
condition. I live in the SF Bay area and will drive to pick up if the
price is right.  Thanks..

Also have for sale GRE handheld antenna amplifier with new battery and
AC adapter.  Works on base units too. I bought new for 69.00 will sell
for 35.00.

Monty

[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:40 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news1.best.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.corpcomm.net!news
From: J&L's Subscription Services <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.marketplace,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.roller-coaster,rec.running,rec.scuba,rec.skydiving,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Your Favorites
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 21:52:25 -0700
Organization: J&L's Subscription Services
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.70.247.42
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; U)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.photo.marketplace:58047 rec.photo.equipment.35mm:36263 rec.roller-coaster:42224 rec.running:71789 rec.scuba:118317 rec.skydiving:62693 rec.radio.scanner:68339 rec.radio.shortwave:86703 rec.radio.swap:91197 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:29998

IT'S TRUE, J&L'S SUBSCRIPTIONS SERVICES HAS UNBELIEVABLY LOW PRICES!!!!

J&L's Subscription Services has all of your favorite magazines
FOR 1/2 PRICE.  Here are just a few favorite titles like...

AUDIO
AUTOMOBILE
BASEBALL DIGEST
BOATING
CAR & DRIVER
COMPUTER SHOPPER
FIELD & STREAM
MUSCLE & FITNESS
PC MAGAZINE
POPULAR PHOTOGRAPHY
ROLLING STONE
SASSY
SEVENTEEN
SKIING
SOAP OPERA DIGEST
SPORTING NEWS (NEW)
TRAVEL & LEISURE
US NEWS & WORLD REPORT
WOMAN'S DAY

If you didn't see your favorite, don't worry, this is just a
small sample of our hundreds of great titles.  To see our
complete list with prices, visit our online catalog at:

http://www.hway.net/jandl/mag.htm

You may orderline!  No credit card needed!  All we need to process
your order is your name, address and phone number.


Sincerely,
James Stapleton
J&L's Subscription Services
Hundreds of Magazines - up to 50% OFF!
http://www.hway.net/jandl/mag.htm




From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:41 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!news.ot.centuryinter.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (nhoop)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.marketplace,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.roller-coaster,rec.running,rec.scuba,rec.skydiving,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Your Favorites
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 21:51:56 GMT
Organization: Century Internet
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: anxp17.hd.centuryinter.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/16.299
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.photo.marketplace:58137 rec.photo.equipment.35mm:36348 rec.roller-coaster:42275 rec.running:71840 rec.scuba:118422 rec.skydiving:62793 rec.radio.scanner:68420 rec.radio.shortwave:86752 rec.radio.swap:91297 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30031

x-no-archive: yes
>IT'S TRUE, J&L'S SUBSCRIPTIONS SERVICES HAS UNBELIEVABLY LOW PRICES!!!!

>You may orderline!=20

No way, clown! If you're crooked enough to advertise here, I wouldn't =
watto
do business with you.

Nat


From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:42 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!crusty.teleport.com!nntp0.teleport.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Steve Kennedy)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.marketplace,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.roller-coaster,rec.running,rec.scuba,rec.skydiving,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Your Favorites
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 16:53:15 GMT
Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access [phone]
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <540fhj$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx12-18.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.photo.marketplace:58211 rec.photo.equipment.35mm:36428 rec.roller-coaster:42310 rec.running:71895 rec.scuba:118486 rec.skydiving:62856 rec.radio.scanner:68475 rec.radio.shortwave:86786 rec.radio.swap:91375 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30058

J&L's Subscription Services <[e-mail]> wrote:

>IT'S TRUE, J&L'S SUBSCRIPTIONS SERVICES HAS UNBELIEVABLY LOW PRICES!!!!

>J&L's Subscription Services has all of your favorite magazines
>FOR 1/2 PRICE.  Here are just a few favorite titles like...

<BIG SNIP>


Let me guess, you paid someone MONEY for a "get rich quick on the net"
seminar or tape, didn't you?  I suggest you take sensitivity training
or a reality check instead, this isn't appropriate here.

Steve



From [e-mail] Sat Oct 19 10:04:43 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.io.com!usenet
From: GKeown <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.marketplace,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.roller-coaster,rec.running,rec.scuba,rec.skydiving,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Your Favorites
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 19:35:00 -0500
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup-01-153.austin.io.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.photo.marketplace:58273 rec.photo.equipment.35mm:36473 rec.roller-coaster:42339 rec.running:71918 rec.scuba:118534 rec.skydiving:62891 rec.radio.scanner:68510 rec.radio.shortwave:86822 rec.radio.swap:91435 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30072

J&L's Subscription Services wrote:
>
> IT'S TRUE, J&L'S SUBSCRIPTIONS SERVICES HAS UNBELIEVABLY LOW PRICES!!!!
>
> J&L's Subscription Services has all of your favorite magazines
> FOR 1/2 PRICE.  Here are just a few favorite titles like...
>   To see our
> complete list with prices, visit our online catalog at:
>
> http://www.hway.net/jandl/mag.htm
>
> You may orderline!  No credit card needed!  All we need to process
> your order is your name, address and phone number.
>
> Sincerely,
> James Stapleton
> J&L's Subscription Services
> Hundreds of Magazines - up to 50% OFF!
> http://www.hway.net/jandl/mag.htm


Seem like I have seen this guy's stuff spammed across almost every
newsgroup that I subscribe to.  Maybe a couple of letters to his
postmaster would get someone's attention.

Gerald


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:06 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!newsfeed.concentric.net!news.sojourn.com!cancer.vividnet.com!hunter.premier.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Robert A. Schill)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: (none)
Date: 26 Oct 96 12:02:08 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

add [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:07 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!newsfeed.concentric.net!news.texas.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.erols.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (John Q. Public)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: (none)
Date: 26 Oct 96 21:37:54 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

add ham-ant



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:07 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!qualcomm.com!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (EDWARD C GRAY)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: (none)
Date: 29 Oct 96 18:20:43 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

subscribe


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:08 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news-out.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Bruce Talkington)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 17 Meter Antenna
Date: 22 Oct 96 11:55:24 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

I am thinking of building a 1/4 wave vertical for 17 meters and putting
it on top of my house, the top of the house is about 19 foot from the
ground. Then I thought that I would put the ground radials from the
antenna over the roof. Was planning on building the antenna from 1 1/4
inch thin wall metal pipe.
Question is, has anyone tried something like this, and will the antenna
work for dx on 17 meters? I know a beam would do better, but for now
that is out of the question, so either a vertical, or a sloper is about
my only option for this band.

73/Bruce..N4ZEZ
Andalusia, Alabama


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:09 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!nntp.uio.no!news.global-one.no!news1.transpac.net!news5.transpac.net!oden.abc.se!dos.canit.se!seunet!mn7.swip.net!mn6.swip.net!mn5.swip.net!news
From: Maude Schyffert <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 17 Meter Antenna
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 17:23:51 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup97-5-8.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 3.01b1Gold (Win16; I)
To: Bruce Talkington <[e-mail]>

Bruce Talkington wrote:
>
> I am thinking of building a 1/4 wave vertical for 17 meters and putting
> it on top of my house, the top of the house is about 19 foot from the
> ground. Then I thought that I would put the ground radials from the
> antenna over the roof. Was planning on building the antenna from 1 1/4
> inch thin wall metal pipe.
> Question is, has anyone tried something like this, and will the antenna
> work for dx on 17 meters? I know a beam would do better, but for now
> that is out of the question, so either a vertical, or a sloper is about
> my only option for this band.
>
> 73/Bruce..N4ZEZ
> Andalusia, Alabama

1/4 vertical for 17 meters is around 4.25 meters, the radials would be
fine on the roof but the vertical element could be thinner.

SM0BKZ


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:10 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!sunrise.gv.ssi1.com!oronet!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jim Weir)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2 meter antenna for severe weather repeater site
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 16:28:39 GMT
Organization: RST Engineering
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <54qpv2$[e-mail]>
References: <54q8qn$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: rst-engr.oro.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:

->I posted this message once before, but have not seen it on the list.
->Please excuse if this is a repeat posting.

->Can anyone recommend  a 2 meter base antenna for a severe weather
->repeater site?

You are going to get a couple of dozen posts telling you why the approach I
suggest won't work.  However, I'm willing to put my money, my design, and a
set of free parts where my mouth is if you are willing to run a real
engineering type  test and report the results to this group.

I'm going to modify the plans I normally put out for my design of the
j-pole antenna to make it work in what I would consider a rather harsh
environment.  I've seen the unmodified version work in 90 MPH winds and I
suspect that the modified version will be good to 120-130 or so.  But
that's just a guess and I'm not a good enough STRUCTURAL engineer to be
able to tell you where the failure mode will occur.

Gain?  None over a dipole.  But at 13,000 MSL, I think that gain would be
the least of your problems -- I'd worry more about omnidirectional
coverage.  There are those who are going to tell you that the j-pole has
goofy sidelobes and such.  I suggest that you try my design and either
prove them right or wrong for yourself.  You certainly have the mother
antenna "mast" of all time.

If it fails, you've lost some copper pipe and some time and the only way to
prove that this will or will not work is to try it.

Jim

Jim Weir VP Engineering | You bet your sweet patootie I speak for the
RST Engineering         | company.  If I don't, ain't nobody gonna.
Grass Valley CA 95945   |
http://www.rst-engr.com | AR Adv WB6BHI--FCC 1st phone---Cessna 182A N73CQ
[e-mail]        | Commercial/CFI-Airplane/Glider-A&P-FAA Counselor



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:11 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!newspump.sol.net!news.mindspring.com!usenet
From: "Mark" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 2 receivers w/one antenna questions
Date: 27 Oct 1996 20:09:58 GMT
Organization: SOHObusiness Services
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <01bbc443$254ee140$a3d879a8@soho>
NNTP-Posting-Host: user-168-121-216-163.dialup.mindspring.com
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

A newby question on antennas.  I have two receivers (scanner type) that I
would like to run from the same discone antenna.  The questions are:

a) is there a splitter switch that will all two radios to use the same
antenna at the same time?
b) are there any problems associated with doing that?
c) would there be a difference it the splitter was at the antenna (with the
obvious exception of an extra 75' of coax?

Thanks for the help

Mark


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:12 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!mrwolf.demon.co.uk!Mandy
From: Mandy Wright <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2 receivers w/one antenna questions
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 00:44:23 +0000
Organization: Radio Services
Lines: 27
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbc443$254ee140$a3d879a8@soho>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mrwolf.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: mrwolf.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 3.00 <oJPoSssIZV2StO2Ral+KdVy6du>

In article <01bbc443$254ee140$a3d879a8@soho>, Mark
<[e-mail]> writes
>A newby question on antennas.  I have two receivers (scanner type) that I
>would like to run from the same discone antenna.  The questions are:
>
>a) is there a splitter switch that will all two radios to use the same
>antenna at the same time?
>b) are there any problems associated with doing that?
>c) would there be a difference it the splitter was at the antenna (with the
>obvious exception of an extra 75' of coax?
>
>Thanks for the help
>
>Mark
Use a broad-band splitter (hybrid-transformer) as used on FM and TV
distribution systems ( in the UK, Labgear, Wolsley, and Antiference
available from Aerial Techniques in Poole, or Astra Aerials in Croydon).
Do not use a resistive splitter of the type sold by Woolworths, Tandy's
etc.
This will give 6db loss on each output leg.
This will cause no problems and can be done at either end the losses
will be the same in both cases.
Hope this helps.
Mandy
(Replying on behalf of my husband, Tim (G1BCR / G9BZW), who hates computers
despite (or maybe because of) being a practising RF Engineer.)
(He's going to *have* to learn to type!)        Sussex  UK


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:13 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!warwick!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Mr M R Bowman)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 2/70cm Colinear
Date: 23 Oct 1996 15:28:14 +0100
Organization: University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <54la1u$[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]


Hi, i wonder if anyone has information on how to make a small dual band
collinear similar to the watson x30.  I am restriced to around 1 metre
in length.

Any ideas would be great.

73 Martin    G7VHE

E-mail  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:14 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!qualcomm.com!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 2m dipole help!
Date: 26 Oct 96 00:24:09 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]


In a message dated 96-10-24 22:24:08 EDT, someone wrote:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

<< Subj:        2m dipole help!
 Date:  96-10-24 22:24:08 EDT
 From:    \
 Sender:           \
 Reply-to:   /      DELETED by KD8WU
 To:          /

 hello all,,

                  question,, i need to construct a 2-meter dipole,,
 for fm repeater use,, will it be very narrow banded?,, and with a
 3inch center insulator,, what would be the ideal length of each half
 on either side of the insulator for a frequency output of 145.570 ?

 i would like it to be a full wavelength dipole.

 thanks all.
 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Is this *DUMBING DOWN*  of ham radio, or what????


Bob
KD8WU


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:15 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!insync!gryphon.phoenix.net!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: 2m dipole help!
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 17:34:43 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.102.182
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

[e-mail] wrote:
> Is this *DUMBING DOWN*  of ham radio, or what????
> Bob KD8WU

I dunno, Bob, is a G5RV a dipole?

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


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:16 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 30m vertical suggestions?
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 00:17:41 -0700
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 116.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Ramon Gandia wrote:
>
> Andrew Mitchell wrote:
> >
> > I'm contemplating building some type of vertical for 30 m.  I don't have
> > too much area for radials.  The installation would be ground mount or
> > near ground.  Any suggestions would be appreciated.
>
> Andy:
>
> If you have limited room or no room for radials, then you have to
> have a half wave vertical.  Just putting up one radial or two
> won't really do.  Ground mounted verticals are not good performers,
> so the elevated half wave vertical is the only good installation
>
> If you want to put in a ground mount vertical with just a ground
> rod or two, it will load up fine, but performance will be poor
> and it will pick up a lot of noise.

altavoz : Even if i had the room , id do half wave vert' with
a cap hat to bring the pattern down and reduce the ht a little
N6PL , Paul H. Lee   "vert ant" book is good .




>
> --
> In order to foil SpamBots, my e-mail address is not
> machine readable.  Please reply to address below:
>
> Ramon Gandia,    Nome, Alaska  |    rfg.at.nome.dot.net
> AL7X          S/V Seven Stars  |
> 907-443-2437 fax [phone]  | where at=@  dot=period

--

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:17 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!iglou!iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: 40 meter horizontal loop antenna
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services (1-800-436-4456)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <551898$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 16:28:30 GMT
Lines: 41

Consider cutting the loop for the low end of the 40 meter cw band. At the
feedpoint, put a 4:1 current, bead type balun and feed with 50 ohm coax.
This will:

1. Give you multiband coverage of 40, 20 15, 10 meters with a low swr.
2. Give RFI free performance.
3. Make it easy to get the feeder into the shack
4. Grounding the shield will help prevent lightning damage.

The balun can be obtained from The Wireman or Radio Works for about $40.
Don't confuse it with a voltage balun. This one uses about 200 beads.

Cut the loop for 80 or 160 and cover those bands if you have the space.

On the WARC bands, you may need a tuner but even then, the swr won't be
much over 3:1.

If swr is a little high, try adding various lengths to the coax to make it
come out right. I prefer using RG-8 coax.



K9SQG ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Would like to hear of people's OWN experiences with a horizontal loop
: antenna for 40 meters for cases where the antenna is close to the earth,
: say 12-15 feet, and fed with open wire line.  Interest in knowing how
: effective it is for close in ragchewing NOT DX.  Also, interested in
: knowing what the best configuration is for using this antenna on 160 e.g.
: feed as a long wire, tie feeders together and use as a top loaded
: vertical, etc.  Finally, when feeding the antenna with open wire line, has
: anybody experienced unpleasant effects due to the length of the open wire
: feeders (e.g. high rf voltage in the shack)?

: Thanks...

: Evan

: [e-mail]

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


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:18 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!server-b.cs.interbusiness.it!server-b.cs.interbusiness.it!slip6.etrurianet.it!user
From: [e-mail] (Riccardo Gaggioli)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 40 mt twin dipole?
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 02:16:34 +0100
Organization: Centro Servizi Interbusiness
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip6.etrurianet.it

Hello,I'm IK5WQO,and I'd like to send a question:can I connect two dipoles
in parallel,positioned at 90 degrees one from the other,to obtain an
omnidirectional antenna(and,the impedance is also 1/2 of the single
dipole?)?
Or,to obtain best results(but more complexity),it is necessary to use the
two dipoles at 90 degrees not connected one to the oter,and switch the
best-hearing one?
Other question,how can I simulate this situation on mininec?how can I
simulate a quad on mininec also?
Thank you for the answer(s).
73 de Rik


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:19 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!ausnews.austin.ibm.com!rtpnews.raleigh.ibm.com!bocanews.bocaraton.ibm.com!watnews.watson.ibm.com!grimsel.zurich.ibm.com!usenet
From: wickies@
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 5/8 wavelength antenna???
Date: 23 Oct 1996 13:55:58 GMT
Organization: IBM Zurich Research Laboratory
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <54l85e$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: chris-wickland.havant.ibm.com
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2

Hi
   I am currently studying for my amateur license and am currently using europ
ean
CB band for general comms.  Can any one out there tell me how to make an
5/8 wavelength antenna for the  11 meter band.  I need to know the length of
the antenna and the coil diameter with the amount of wire windings per inch et
c.

Thanks in advance

Chris Wickland
All things are possible to him who beleives
CSO TECH SUPPORT SPECIALIST
IBM
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:20 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.stealth.net!demos!news1.relcom.ru!Gamma.RU!srcc!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 5/8 wavelength antenna???
Date: 23 Oct 1996 17:14:59 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <54ljqj$[e-mail]>
References: <54l85e$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

>I am currently studying for my amateur license and am currently using europea
n
>CB band for general comms.  Can any one out there tell me how to make an
>5/8 wavelength antenna for the 11 meter band.

Just buy one. Believe me, by the time you bought all the tubing and other
material, you paid more than for a bought one. If you have a good source
for tubing, keep it and use it for more exotic bands when you have your
ticket.

good luck, Moritz





From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:21 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.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: 5/8 wavelength antenna???
Date: 24 Oct 1996 14:42:21 GMT
Organization: Rocky Mountain Internet - (800) 900-RMII
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <54nv8d$[e-mail]>
References: <54l85e$[e-mail]> <54ljqj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rainbow.rmii.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

[e-mail] wrote:
: >I am currently studying for my amateur license and am currently using europ
ean
: >CB band for general comms.  Can any one out there tell me how to make an
: >5/8 wavelength antenna for the 11 meter band.

: Just buy one. Believe me, by the time you bought all the tubing and other
: material, you paid more than for a bought one. If you have a good source
: for tubing, keep it and use it for more exotic bands when you have your
: ticket.

Don't let him discourage you.  We need fewer licensed appliance
operators and more experienced Amateur Radio Operators.

Many times I have built something that cost me more than a
store-bought item.

But, when I was done -- I didn't have a warranty, I had knowledge.

Good luck to you!!  Enjoy the hobby!!

73
Jonesy W3DHJ
__
SK

--
Marvin Jones  [e-mail]
Gunnison, Colorado


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:22 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 5/8 wavelength antenna???
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 10:38:33 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54l85e$[e-mail]> <54ljqj$[e-mail]> <54nv8d$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 185.los-angeles-007.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Bea and Marvin Jones wrote:
>
> [e-mail] wrote:
> : >I am currently studying for my amateur license and am currently using eur
opean
> : >CB band for general comms.  Can any one out there tell me how to make an
> : >5/8 wavelength antenna for the 11 meter band.
>
> : Just buy one. Believe me, by the time you bought all the tubing and other
> : material, you paid more than for a bought one. If you have a good source
> : for tubing, keep it and use it for more exotic bands when you have your
> : ticket.
>
> Don't let him discourage you.  We need fewer licensed appliance
> operators and more experienced Amateur Radio Operators.
>
> Many times I have built something that cost me more than a
> store-bought item.
>
> But, when I was done -- I didn't have a warranty, I had knowledge.
>
> Good luck to you!!  Enjoy the hobby!!
>
> 73
> Jonesy W3DHJ
> __
> SK
>
> --
> Marvin Jones  [e-mail]
> Gunnison, Colorado

altavoz: Get some old PCB and pool acid and etch all the
copper off and cut them into strips and drill bolt holes
to make an insulator for the 5/8w vert element. You'll
have many strips of PCB together to form a thick chunk of
fiberglass. DONT USE PLASTIC PIPE AS INSULATOR , IT GETS
WEAK , fiberglass doesnt. The ARRL handbook has the matching
info , but yours will be a litle different. The radials
will be 5/8w tube or wires going down with some additional
radials off at a 45 deg angle fastened 1/4 w down on the
main radials . run the coax up thru the radials (tube).
BUY AN MFJ 249? 209? SWR box, they will beat anything for
fast antenna tuning. There's only one argument on a 5/8w
at higher frequencies , ever inch of coax is a attenuator
so the addition coax running up thru the tube is not helping
the gain , but fortunately the radials ( tube) is shorter on
VHF antennas. I use RG8FOAM for my 1 watt HT's .
   9913 is a joke ! The improvement isnt worth the hassle.
Strange things happen with the ether ! I put up 4 element
VHF yagi on a wooden pole to prevent metallic interaction.
months later i checked its gain then put it against a
steel pole ( 1/2 way down ) and got much better gain !
4" away from a 1.5" steel pole .

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:23 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.logical.net!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 5/8 wavelength antenna???
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 05:57:56 GMT
Organization:
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54l85e$[e-mail]> <54ljqj$[e-mail]> <54nv8d$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup034.qnsbny1.capital.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.1/32.230

altavoz <[e-mail]> wrote:

Do you have a name and/or call sign, or should we just defer to the
Wizard of altavOZ?

Butch N2YMJ


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:25 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!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] (JAMES MCEWEN)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 5/8's antennas & coax matching sections
Date: 29 Oct 96 22:18:29 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

     Why don't we combine these threads?

     The Wiz of AltavOZ is correct(slightly) because a 1/4 *L*
     (wavelength) SHORTED section has the same input impedance as an
     OPEN 1/2 *L* section.  No one has defined what kind of section
     they are talking about.(open or shorted)

     The Wiz is also correct (slightly) because the physical length of
     antennas are less then the electrical length, because of end
     effects and wire diameter. But if I understand his reference,
     this isn't what he is talking about.  He is referring to short
     antennas with base loading and tapped coils for matching, as is
     done in many mobile installations.  This isn't what most of the
     others are discussing.
     The Wiz was also correct in his understanding of what a conjugate
     match is and what a 1/2 *L* section will do but again that wasn't
     the question that Cecil, W6RCA, was answering, or what he was
     talking about.
     So Wiz, you are correct in what you say, but thats not what the
     rest of us are talking about.

     The 5/8 *L* has more gain then the 1/4 *L* antenna IF it has a
     large ground screen (like 5/8-1/2 *L*), this is mostly in lower
     angle radiation.  If the ground screen is <= 1/4 *L*, then it
     develops high angle lobes, reducing the power in the lower lobes
     and has a pattern that may be less desirable then a 1/4 *L*
     ground plane. It also requires a matching network to operate with
     coaxial cable, which a 1/4 *L* ground plane antenna does not.
     Sorry Wiz, you are just incorrect in your statement that all 1/4
     *L* antennas need at matching network, or that they are tuned by
     a coil.

     Once again you people keep talking apples and oranges.  A point
     source has the same radiating ability as a 1/4 *L* or 5/8 *L*
     antenna, but it distributes the power in a sphere. 50 watts into
     the air is 50 watts, how is  distributed is what makes a
     difference.

     Again I have to disagree with the Wiz, in that a J-pole does
     work. Maybe not at an optimum point for low angle radiation, or
     at an optimum point for a horizontal pattern, but it has certain
     factors that make it much more convenient then a 5/8 *L*, size
     being one of them.  If you are trying to contact an airplane at
     an elevation of 45 degrees then an antenna with a low angle of
     radiation is a pretty poor performer.  If it is a repeater on a
     mountain peak, you may have the same problems.

     So I'll make a challenge.  Instead of personally attacking
     someone, ask what they mean.  When you make a statement, state
     what your boundary conditions are, anything I read in this
     newsgroup that has the words ALWAYS and NEVER in it make me
     suspect the experience and maturity of the author.

     Jim KA6TPR




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:26 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 5/8's antennas & coax matching sections
Date: 29 Oct 1996 23:42:35 GMT
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.10)
Lines: 5
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news-fddi.aol.com

Thanks Jim, for reiterating my point on the gain. Few people realize that
a 5/8 needs a substantial GP to afford any gain.

73
Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:27 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!cornellcs!uw-beaver!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!cs.ubc.ca!cs.ubc.ca!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Dave Martindale)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 5/8's antennas & coax matching sections
Date: 29 Oct 1996 20:05:15 -0800
Organization: Computer Science, University of B.C., Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <556k5r$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: redgreen.cs.ubc.ca

[e-mail] (JAMES MCEWEN) writes:
|     anything I read in this
|     newsgroup that has the words ALWAYS and NEVER in it make me
|     suspect the experience and maturity of the author.

That's a good observation for *any* newsgroup.

        Dave


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:27 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!yarak.pr.mcs.net!yarak
From: The Kirby's <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 6 Meter Copper J pole questions
Date: 26 Oct 1996 02:45:41 GMT
Organization: YARAK
Lines: 9
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <54ru0l$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: yarak.pr.mcs.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Newsreader: Nuntius 2.0.4_68K
X-XXMessage-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-XXDate: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 02:45:41 GMT

Does anyone have the specs for a 6 meter copper J pole using one inch
copper tubing i.e. the spacing from tubing center lines between radiator
and stub?
Any leads to recent or past magazine/book articles also appreciated. Tks
& 73 KB9NLY

   The Kirby's                               [e-mail]
 St. Charles, IL                     __________________________
     60174                         A CITIZEN IN THE STATE OF YARAK


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:28 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!myth.vianet.on.ca!newsfeed.vivanet.com!imci5!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!fu-berlin.de!unlisys!news.maz.net!news.allcon.net!jgfl1!griffin
From: [e-mail] (Jens Goerke)
Subject: Re: 6 Meter Copper J pole questions
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Organization: Private Multi-Site
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54ru0l$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 09:45:18 GMT
Lines: 12

The Kirby's ([e-mail]) wrote:
> Does anyone have the specs for a 6 meter copper J pole using one inch
> copper tubing i.e. the spacing from tubing center lines between radiator
> and stub?

I don't have the specs, but from the 2m J pole versions I've seen
spacing doesn't seem to be critical. I would try 5-10 cm (2-4").

Hope that helps,
        Jens, DB9LL
--
What _was_ your username again? <clickety clickety click>


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:29 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 6 Meter Copper J pole questions
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 22:00:55 -0700
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54ru0l$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

The Kirby's wrote:
>
> Does anyone have the specs for a 6 meter copper J pole using one inch
> copper tubing i.e. the spacing from tubing center lines between radiator
> and stub?
> Any leads to recent or past magazine/book articles also appreciated. Tks
> & 73 KB9NLY
> altavoz: You do realize the J pole has been proven inferior
to the standard 5/8w vert with a tube as the radial system and
coax up thru the tube to feed a matching coil . Down this
tube you can put additional radials at a 45 deg angle that
form a cone . Its the gain ( pattern) thats far superior
than the J pole. It costs the same , so whats the big deal?


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:30 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: Merv Stump <[e-mail]@postoffice.worldnet.att.net>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 72 ohm to 50 ohm
Date: 23 Oct 1996 13:42:39 GMT
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <54l7cf$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 37.bridgeton-052.mo.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)

In my opinion any effort spent in trying to improve on the SWR resulting
from the use of this cable would be a waste of time.  If you are concerned
simply cut the coax to a length which is a multiple of a half-wave(don't
forget the velocity factor) and it will carry the impedance at the antenna
to the transmitter without change.

However, unless your transmitter complains about the minor
mismatch(and I don't think it will) I would recommend that you do
nothing.  Enjoy the great cable.

Regards, Merv



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:31 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!nntp.crl.com!news5.crl.com!nexp.crl.com!usenet
From: Dave Booth <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 72 ohm to 50 ohm
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 13:33:51 -0700
Organization: KC6WFS
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 165.113.223.131
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (X11; U; IRIX 5.3 IP19)

Hello,
I just got some 72 ohm 1/2 cable tv hardline, alum jacketed.
Is there a easy and inexpensive way to reduce the resistance to 50
ohms to get the swr down a tad?
Also where can I buy connectors for this?
Thanks


Dave Booth
http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/5860/


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:32 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!demos!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 72 ohm to 50 ohm
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 19:33:29 -0700
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

david hand wrote:
>
> Dave Booth wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> > I just got some 72 ohm 1/2 cable tv hardline, alum jacketed.
> > Is there a easy and inexpensive way to reduce the resistance to 50
> > ohms to get the swr down a tad?
> > Also where can I buy connectors for this?
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> > Dave Booth
> > http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/5860/
>
> SWR is low enough not to be  a real issue but if you insist you can
> do one of the following ....
>
>         1. easiest cut to 1/2 wave at req freq ... SWR doesnt
>            go away but you dont see it. You see (SWR)only the load


altavoz: wrong , the SWR will be same ( except for small,linear
decrease of SWR cause of  attenuation).
As you step away from the antenna( 50+j0) the voltage peaks are
worst here and decrease towards the radio. The SWR decreases linearly
towards the radio due to attenuation. You can reduce SWR to safe levels
with a long enough coax but the power radiating from antenna wont be good.
Your radio will be safe , but you'll melt snow on the coax and radiate
little power.



> Good Luck !
> Dave WB4HYP

--

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:33 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 72 ohm to 50 ohm
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 19:58:23 -0700
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

altavoz wrote:
>
> david hand wrote:
> >
> > Dave Booth wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > > I just got some 72 ohm 1/2 cable tv hardline, alum jacketed.
> > > Is there a easy and inexpensive way to reduce the resistance to 50
> > > ohms to get the swr down a tad?
> > > Also where can I buy connectors for this?
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > >
> > > Dave Booth
> > > http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/5860/
> >
> > SWR is low enough not to be  a real issue but if you insist you can
> > do one of the following ....
> >
> >         1. easiest cut to 1/2 wave at req freq ... SWR doesnt
> >            go away but you dont see it. You see (SWR)only the load
>
> altavoz: wrong , the SWR will be same ( except for small,linear
> decrease of SWR cause of  attenuation).
> As you step away from the antenna( 50+j0) the voltage peaks are
> worst here and decrease towards the radio. The SWR decreases linearly
> towards the radio due to attenuation. You can reduce SWR to safe levels
> with a long enough coax but the power radiating from antenna wont be good.
> Your radio will be safe , but you'll melt snow on the coax and radiate
> little power.


altavoz:  POST SCRIPT !! I didnt answer your question well.
The 72 ohm coax wont set up enough SWR to melt snow,or burn
your radio, you'll need a much higher like 8:1  10:1 etc.
  You can get a 1:1 SWR by bending 90 degree radials down
to 120 or 140 degrees on a vertical ,and get a perfect 72 ohms
  Dont worry about SWR, worry about radiation pattern .
Put cap hats on, and play with radial angles, element
lengths  to change the pattern ( you'll also change
the feedpoint Z).
BTW all antennas are shorter than 1/4 and longer than 1/2 w
( ant=capacitive) to allow tuning with just a coil.


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:35 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.indy.net!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 72 ohm to 50 ohm
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 19:41:55 -0700
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 61
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Joseph M. Zawodny wrote:
>
> Steve Gorecki wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 22 Oct 1996 13:33:51 -0700, Dave Booth <[e-mail]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >Hello,
> > >I just got some 72 ohm 1/2 cable tv hardline, alum jacketed.
> > >Is there a easy and inexpensive way to reduce the resistance to 50
> > >ohms to get the swr down a tad?
> > >Also where can I buy connectors for this?
> > >Thanks
> > >
> > >
> > >Dave Booth
> > >http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/5860/
> >
> > Check into ZD Engineering. They used to make matching sections to
> > match impedence of 75 ohm CATV to 50ohms over a specific frequency
> > range. I bought a couple about 3 years ago, for 2M and 440, and they
> > work fine. Sorry, I don't have an address, but I think they are
> > located somewhere around Wisconsin or Michigan. Perhaps someone else
> > can give you an address. Remember, these matching devices are
> > frequency specific. the 2M one is good only for 2M, etc. Once you go
> > about 10% off frequency, the SWR climbs.
> >
> > Steve   VE3CWJ
> > [e-mail]
>
> They are located in Ohio.  I'll try to remember to get the address
> and phone number.  I ordered three sets from ZD 2 on 2m and 1 on 70cm.
> They work great and work on multiple bands where the frequencies are
> in odd integer multiples (like 144 and 432MHz or 432 and 1296MHz).
> They run in the $35 to $40 range, but the real catch is that you will
> have to wait a long time to get them and spend money on long distance
> phone bills coercing him to make a set for you. I waited nearly a
> year before I got mine and only after I made 4 extensive phone calls
> (he likes to yak and make excuses).  Having said that and having the
> experience with these units, I must admit that I would do it all again!
> One last note, I know of a person who just ignores the 72 - 50O Ohm
> mismatch on his 300' run of 7/8" hardline, but he is running only on
> HF and the losses on these frequencies is negligible.  On the other
> hand I'm using a 2m set on 200+' of 7/8" and feeding 144 & 432MHz via
> duplexers (diplexers?) at each end.  The loss at 432MHz is only 2.1 dB
> (including the duplexer loss)!
>

KO4LW  Joe Zawodny


altavoz: At HF , the tuner can be at the radio, cause the SWR
wont be attenuated as much going back to the radio as VHF.
At VHF, 100' of RG8 foam and tuner at radio , with high SWR
.....forget it!

A quarter wave section of 60ohm line at the antenna, in
series to the 72ohm  should transform the 50+j00 antenna
to the 72 ohm coax. But 60ohm is not available at RAT SHACK .
the radio doesnt care about feeding the 72ohm, but only at
one frequency ( the 1/4 wave ties down the radio to one freq).


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:36 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!news.uoregon.edu!news.efn.org!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Dick Hughes)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 72 ohm to 50 ohm
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 04:42:36 GMT
Organization: Oregon Public Networking
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dynip186.efn.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.299

On Tue, 22 Oct 1996 13:33:51 -0700, Dave Booth <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>Hello,
>I just got some 72 ohm 1/2 cable tv hardline, alum jacketed.
>Is there a easy and inexpensive way to reduce the resistance to 50
>ohms to get the swr down a tad?
>Also where can I buy connectors for this?
>Thanks
>
>
>Dave Booth
>http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/5860/

There is a 52 to 75-ohm broadband transformer in the ARRL Antenna
Handbook that is specifically for this purpose.  Looks fairly easy to
build.

Dick Hughes - W6CCD


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:37 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!psinntp!psinntp!jeefers.microdes.com!usenet
From: Dave Hand <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 72 ohm to 50 ohm
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 08:30:26 -0500
Organization: Micro Design International, Inc.
Lines: 49
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dhand.mdi.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

altavoz wrote:
>
> david hand wrote:
> >
> > Dave Booth wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > > I just got some 72 ohm 1/2 cable tv hardline, alum jacketed.
> > > Is there a easy and inexpensive way to reduce the resistance to 50
> > > ohms to get the swr down a tad?
> > > Also where can I buy connectors for this?
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > >
> > > Dave Booth
> > > http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/5860/
> >
> > SWR is low enough not to be  a real issue but if you insist you can
> > do one of the following ....
> >
> >         1. easiest cut to 1/2 wave at req freq ... SWR doesnt
> >            go away but you dont see it. You see (SWR)only the load
>
> altavoz: wrong , the SWR will be same ( except for small,linear
> decrease of SWR cause of  attenuation).
> As you step away from the antenna( 50+j0) the voltage peaks are
> worst here and decrease towards the radio. The SWR decreases linearly
> towards the radio due to attenuation. You can reduce SWR to safe levels
> with a long enough coax but the power radiating from antenna wont be good.
> Your radio will be safe , but you'll melt snow on the coax and radiate
> little power.
>
>
> > Good Luck !
> > Dave WB4HYP
>
> --
>
> ______End of text  from altavoz___________

The original question was on 75/50 transmission line, I assumed in my
reply that the load and source were resonably close to 50 ohms.
SWR in that context is the mismatch caused by the 75 ohm transmission
line.

I stand by my statements, Your reponse is grossly misleading.

Dave Hand
WB4HYP


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:38 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!rhelton
From: [e-mail] (Richard Helton)
Subject: 73 magazine's CCD antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 18:16:53 GMT
Lines: 12
Sender: [e-mail]

Does anyone have any opion of this antenna?

The article did not give a great deal of information on designing for
other than 7 Mhz, so doe's anyone have this information they can share?

It is a rather interesting design if it performs as advertised.

Thank you

Richard KF6ATJ
--
                                             [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:38 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 73 magazine's CCD antenna
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 12:21:45 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 185.los-angeles-007.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Richard Helton wrote:
>
> Does anyone have any opion of this antenna?
>
> The article did not give a great deal of information on designing for
> other than 7 Mhz, so doe's anyone have this information they can share?
>
> It is a rather interesting design if it performs as advertised.
>
> Thank you
>
> Richard KF6ATJ
> --
>                                              [e-mail]: No d
ont have info ,but word of
mouth is A SERIOUS INCREASE IN RADIATION
EFFICIENCY !! And many bands . Im waiting
for someone to publish it.
--

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:39 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-15.sprintlink.net!news.infi.net!imci5!pull-feed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 73 magazine's CCD antenna
Date: 28 Oct 1996 22:19:10 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 8
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <553t3e$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Huh? Was that supposed to be a parody of a remark?

If you mean the dipole with capacitors along its length, its main benefit
is a high gain dipole pattern, rather than a split petal pattern. This is
NOT a physical 1/2 wave antenna though. If you want the references will
dig out.

Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:40 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 73 magazine's CCD antenna
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 12:22:45 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <553t3e$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 140.los-angeles-007.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Fractenna wrote:
>
> Huh? Was that supposed to be a parody of a remark?
>
> If you mean the dipole with capacitors along its length, its main benefit
> is a high gain dipole pattern, rather than a split petal pattern. This is
> NOT a physical 1/2 wave antenna though. If you want the references will
> dig out.
>
> Chip N1IR


altavoz: Im sure we all would like a chance to learn
about it.
--

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:41 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!rhelton
From: [e-mail] (Richard Helton)
Subject: Re: 73 magazine's CCD antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <[e-mail]> <553t3e$[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 17:28:16 GMT
Lines: 10
Sender: [e-mail]

Fractenna ([e-mail]) wrote:

: If you mean the dipole with capacitors along its length, its main benefit
: is a high gain dipole pattern, rather than a split petal pattern. This is
: NOT a physical 1/2 wave antenna though. If you want the references will
: dig out.

  Do you have further information on this dipole? Please post if you do!
--
                                             [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:42 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!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: 73 magazine's CCD antenna
Date: 29 Oct 1996 17:08:55 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 5
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <555v9n$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

OK; I assume that's what you mean. Will ask my assistant to dig them out
and get back to you later.

73
Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:43 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: RE: 73's CCD Antenna
Date: 29 Oct 1996 18:50:46 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 10
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <55658m$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

There are about 15 references on it, including patents.

I will provide the most accessible one:

' The Controlled Current Distribution Antenna' by S. Kaplan and J. Bauer,
ARRL Antenna Compendium 2, p132 ,1989.

I have not built one.

73 Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:43 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!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] (Rick Markey)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: RE:9913 N connectors
Date: 29 Oct 96 08:05:48 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Bob you're probably talking about the Amphenol 82-61, solder type N =
connectors.  I always file down the center conductor of the 9913 rather =
than try to drill the center pin.  As far as I know, Kings is the only =
company that makes an N connector that will fit 9913.  It's a crimp type =
and it's expensive to buy the darned tooling.  I've never had any =
problems filing the center conductor.  Only problem I've ever had with =
9913 is the lousy shielding.=20

de Rick, KN3C
>>>>>>>>>>>
From: "Bob Smith" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Amphenol N's w/ 9913?

I am finding that the Amphenol connectors I bought for RG8/9913 the =
center
pin is too small for the center conductor.  Usually I drill these out a =
bit
and they work just fine - Question - is this killing any of the required
characteristics?

thanks and 73 de Bob.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:44 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!boulder!usenet
From: Bob Tomas <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Advice on low-noise, low-band receiving antenna???
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 10:42:08 -0600
Organization: Program in Atmospheric & Oceanic Sciences, CU Boulder
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: paos2.colorado.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4m)

I've nearly completed work on a top loaded, short vertical for use
on 160m---some minor tweaking remains.  It seems to work reasonably
ok for transmitting but for receiving the noise level is quite high.
I don't know if the noise is man made or natural but I do know that
there are no fluctuations in intensity or pitch across the band, leading
me to believe it is natural.

Any recommendations for a lower noise antenna would be appreciated.
I should add that I have a small city type lot and don't want to
"decorate it" with too many more wires. I do have a wooden fence
along the perimeter, about 6 feet tall, 300 feet total length---don't
know if this is useful.

Thanks,

Bob


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:45 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!Ireland.EU.net!web3.tcd.ie!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Advice on low-noise, low-band receiving antenna???
Date: 24 Oct 1996 08:07:54 GMT
Organization: Teltec, MEE, Trinity College Dublin
Lines: 32
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <54n84q$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pc97.mee.tcd.ie
X-Newsreader: <WinQVT/Net v3.9>

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

>I've nearly completed work on a top loaded, short vertical for use
>on 160m---some minor tweaking remains.  It seems to work reasonably
>ok for transmitting but for receiving the noise level is quite high.
>I don't know if the noise is man made or natural but I do know that
>there are no fluctuations in intensity or pitch across the band, leading
>me to believe it is natural.
>
>Any recommendations for a lower noise antenna would be appreciated.
>I should add that I have a small city type lot and don't want to
>"decorate it" with too many more wires. I do have a wooden fence
>along the perimeter, about 6 feet tall, 300 feet total length---don't
>know if this is useful.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Bob

Why not try a tuned loop antenna for receive only.  With a reasonable Q factor

the bandwidth would be reduced leading to an overall reduction in noise.

Operating could be a problem as the loop would have to be retuned when the
frequency was changed and the separate receive and transmit antennas could be
a
problem for transceivers (a T?R switch would be necessary.


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


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:46 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Advice on low-noise, low-band receiving antenna???
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 20:10:45 -0700
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54n84q$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

[e-mail] wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, Bob Tomas
> <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> >I've nearly completed work on a top loaded, short vertical for use
> >on 160m---some minor tweaking remains.  It seems to work reasonably
> >ok for transmitting but for receiving the noise level is quite high.
> >I don't know if the noise is man made or natural but I do know that
> >there are no fluctuations in intensity or pitch across the band, leading
> >me to believe it is natural.
> >
> >Any recommendations for a lower noise antenna would be appreciated.
> >I should add that I have a small city type lot and don't want to
> >"decorate it" with too many more wires. I do have a wooden fence
> >along the perimeter, about 6 feet tall, 300 feet total length---don't
> >know if this is useful.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> >Bob
>
> Why not try a tuned loop antenna for receive only.  With a reasonable Q fact
or
> the bandwidth would be reduced leading to an overall reduction in noise.
>
> Operating could be a problem as the loop would have to be retuned when the
> frequency was changed and the separate receive and transmit antennas could b
e a
> problem for transceivers (a T?R switch would be necessary.
>
> Dr. Gerry Butler,

altavoz: You dont top load a 160. You center load and cap hat.
Antennas with top loading will have very high voltages at top.
  A 160m is the most difficult to get a good pattern. You simply
need acres of room and 6 red lights on it !


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:47 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.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: Advice on low-noise, low-band receiving antenna???
Date: 29 Oct 1996 01:27:28 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 23
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <55484g$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

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

>
>altavoz: You dont top load a 160. You center load and cap hat.
>Antennas with top loading will have very high voltages at top.
>  A 160m is the most difficult to get a good pattern. You simply
>need acres of room and 6 red lights on it !
>
>

Gosh, I'd better take down my 160 antennas!'

Seriously top or end loading is best, but you do need (or should use) a
hat or some other large capacitance at the open end.

It can be as simple as a L or T shaped antenna, or as complex as a
multiwire top hat.

In any event, top loading works best ESPECIALLY when the ground suystem is
less than ideal. Of course NONE of this has anything to do with receiving.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:48 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.bc.net!unixg.ubc.ca!van-bc!news.rmii.com!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Advice on low-noise, low-band receiving antenna???
Date: 29 Oct 1996 15:50:52 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 16
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <555qnc$[e-mail]>
References: <555cgk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <555cgk$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:

>
>Um yes.  Maybe he had bettter work VK3IM mobile on 40 CW a few mornings
>in a row down on the low end!  He could tell VK3IM that his 3 foot post
>vertical in a fairing on his small economy car top with that big
combination
>coil and several foot diameter dish like loading coil top capacity hat
won't
>work.

Now for the good part. I've worked VK3IM mobile years ago on 160 METERS
with that antenna!!!! Figure the length of that antenna out on 160, when
compared to a three foot twenty meter antenna!

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:49 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!pm4-01.lkd.nj.webspan.net!user
From: [e-mail] (Adam Martin)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: AM indoor antenna
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 09:05:43 -0400
Organization: WebSpan Inc., New Jersey
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm4-01.lkd.nj.webspan.net

I have a question about AM reception.  I am trying to recieve a station
(1030 AM) at a range of about 300 miles.  On a night with good atmospheric
conditions, I get OK reception with some inteference, however sometimes I
get nothing.  I am only using the little loop antenna that came with my
stereo receiver.

Does anyone have any suggestions about making an antenna (as simple as
possible)? Or maybe a commercial product thats available (inexpensive)?
I'm limited to an indoor antenna.  Also, any suggestions for an
improvement over the cheap FM bipole wire antenna that comes with stereo
receivers?  Obviously I'm not talking about the same range as the AM
antenna, but a 50-60 mile radius would be good.

Thanks much!!


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:50 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.emi.com!news.consultix.com!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!cu-dialup-1922.cit.cornell.edu!user
From: [e-mail] (Joel Govostes)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: AM indoor antenna
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 18:41:55 -0500
Organization: Cornell University
Lines: 51
Sender: [e-mail] (Verified)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cu-dialup-1922.cit.cornell.edu

I presume you want to hear WBZ, Boston on a regular basis.  They have a
great signal most of the time.  First, try changing the orientation of the
loop.  Loops are quite directional(off the sides), and it should be easy
to find which "direction" to point it for the best reception of a desired
station.  On some stereos the loop is clipped on the back and can be swung
to the left or right.

What you might also try is to detatch the loop and mount it as high as
possible, elsewhere in the room, in a window, outside or in the attic.
Connect twin-lead wire to the ends of the loop and bring the wire down to
the stereo and connect it where the loop was, previously.

The ionospheric conditions are ever-changing, and while you might have a
full-blast signal one night, the next it could be lousy.  Conditions
normally improve as we head into winter.  With their coverage and power,
WBZ is about as immune to poor conditions as you can get.

There are other broadcasters on 1030, but they do not normally compete
with the WBZ carrier.  Out here in central NY there is a 1030 station but
it is normally knocked out by 'BZ by late afternoon.

WBZ has some choice programming, including nightly talk with Dr. David
Brudnoy (politics, usually, with a libertarian perspective) and later the
easy-going humor of Norm Nathan.  Some folks may remember the charming
Larry Glick show.

Good luck with your BC listening.  Let me know how you make out...    JWG







In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Adam Martin) wrote:

> I have a question about AM reception.  I am trying to recieve a station
> (1030 AM) at a range of about 300 miles.  On a night with good atmospheric
> conditions, I get OK reception with some inteference, however sometimes I
> get nothing.  I am only using the little loop antenna that came with my
> stereo receiver.
>
> Does anyone have any suggestions about making an antenna (as simple as
> possible)? Or maybe a commercial product thats available (inexpensive)?
> I'm limited to an indoor antenna.  Also, any suggestions for an
> improvement over the cheap FM bipole wire antenna that comes with stereo
> receivers?  Obviously I'm not talking about the same range as the AM
> antenna, but a 50-60 mile radius would be good.
>
> Thanks much!!


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:51 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!news-admin
From: "Bob Smith" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.space
Subject: Amphenol N's w/ 9913?
Date: 28 Oct 1996 15:37:13 GMT
Organization: InternetMCI
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <01bbc4e5$e32f3fa0$aaecbdcc@rsmith>
NNTP-Posting-Host: infolink-204.189.236.170.chicago.mci.net
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30573 rec.radio.amateur.space:8662

I am finding that the Amphenol connectors I bought for RG8/9913 the center
pin is too small for the center conductor.  Usually I drill these out a bit
and they work just fine - Question - is this killing any of the required
characteristics?

thanks and 73 de Bob.


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:52 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dish.news.pipex.net!pipex!wave.news.pipex.net!pipex!soap.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet
From: Philip Simpson <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,uk.radio.amateur,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Antenna Design
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 21:43:18 -0700
Organization: UUNet PIPEX server (post doesn't reflect views of UUNet PIPEX)
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ak143.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: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30326 uk.radio.amateur:22174 rec.radio.shortwave:87208 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20408

Hello,

I would be grateful if any kind DXer's would kindly forward various
articals on both antenna design and manufacture, my main areas of intrest
include, anything from begineer designs thru novice to advanced designs.

Thank-you in anticipation


73's Phil

Please respond direct to e-mail address.


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:53 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.nts-online.net!news
From: James Lee Tabor <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,uk.radio.amateur,rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
Subject: Re: Antenna Design
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 12:15:26 -0500
Organization: Kangaroo Tabor Software
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp06.wtrt.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30363 uk.radio.amateur:22186 rec.radio.shortwave:87236 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20427

Philip Simpson wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I would be grateful if any kind DXer's would kindly forward various
> articals on both antenna design and manufacture, my main areas of intrest
> include, anything from begineer designs thru novice to advanced designs.

CAPMan - The recognized leader in HF propagation prediction software
using the
proven IONCAP engine. CAPMan is a mature package for amateur and
professional
alike featuring advanced system analysis.

CAPMan is excellent for system analysis, meaning in part that it
really shines for use in learning how a particular antenna will
work under real world conditions.

Good Luck,
Jim
--
CAPMan HF Propagation Prediction & System Analysis Software
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/KU5S


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:54 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!netnews.mis.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Buddy Sohl)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: ANTENNA FARM
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 16:24:20 GMT
Organization: Mikrotec Internet Services, Inc. (MISNet)
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: loukyts17.mis.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99d/16.182

On Thu, 24 Oct 1996 10:06:48 -0400, Larry DiGioia <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>Driving down route 80, just over the Pennsylvania/Ohio border,
>you can see one of the most elaborate ham antenna farms in
>existence. At least 10 tall towers in the 100+ foot range, and
>multiple vertical arrays, not to mention wire antennas.
>
>   Does anyone possibly know who this is? I would like to get
>in touch with him and perhaps arrange a tour for some of our
>local guys. Thanks.
>
>||Larry||


Hi Larry,

Ever thought of just dropping by and saying HI.  Nothing brings a
smile to another hams face than "Hi I'm XXXXXX".  I've lived for short
periods of time in OK, TN, MS, AZ and lots of time in KY and met lots
of other hams this way......


73 de KC4WQ
Buddy


Visit the BARS web site http://members.iglou.com/gregl




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:55 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!insync!gryphon.phoenix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-12.sprintlink.net!newsvr.cyberway.com.sg![e-mail]
From: chong kwan meng <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna Temperature
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 14:25:07 -0800
Organization: CyberWay User
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: d57046.ppp57.cyberway.com.sg
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)

I am a new-comer in the field of antenna design. There is one parameter
which I do not quite understand: Antenna Temperature. According to
books, the Antenna Temperature a measurement of the cosmatic noise,
other noises in the earth and the antenna rediation pattern. My question
is : How do measure this Antenna Temperature. Is there anybody out there
can give me some advice?

Best Regards,

K.M Chong


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:56 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!mrwolf.demon.co.uk!Mandy
From: Mandy Wright <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Temperature
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 01:30:06 +0000
Organization: Radio Services
Lines: 75
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
 <01bbc43f$04af4640$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mrwolf.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: mrwolf.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 3.00 <oJPoSssIZV2StO2Ral+KdVy6du>

In article <01bbc43f$04af4640$[e-mail]>, Cliff-s
<[e-mail]> writes
>
>
>chong kwan meng <[e-mail]> wrote in article
><[e-mail]>...
>> I am a new-comer in the field of antenna design. There is one parameter
>> which I do not quite understand: Antenna Temperature. According to
>> books, the Antenna Temperature a measurement of the cosmatic noise,
>> other noises in the earth and the antenna rediation pattern. My question
>> is : How do measure this Antenna Temperature. Is there anybody out there
>> can give me some advice?
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> K.M Chong
>>
>  Kwan:
>               The textbooks give a speculation(I won't agree to
>approximation as the
>word implies some accuracy) as to the noise levels(temperatures) that occur
>at
>various frequencies. Generally the Noise Temp decreases with frequency and
>becomes practically the same as Boltzmans constant above 500mhz. There are
>graphs in various texts(Collin: Antenna and Radiowave propagation Page 319,
>to 324 for example). These a pure speculations because local conditions are
>so
>varible.  The method I would use was to us as low as possible Noise figure
>receiver into a dummy load. Calculate the Noise figure of your receiving
>system.
>Then connect a simple calibrated gain antenna to the receiver and again
>calculate
>the Noise figure of the system. Convert the figures back to Temps and
>you should get a relative idea of the Noise temp of the antenna or more
>correctly
>what the antenna is receiving above Boltzman + system noise. To increase
>accuracy use the current temp instead of the standard used in Boltzman.
> Some have used the Sun as a noise generator at Microwave freqs to get
>relative Noise temps.
> This a subject where the real world challanges the text books. Don't be
>suprised
>with the results you obtain as the world is getting noisier and noiser from
>Electromagnetic noise.  A sort of invisible air polution.
>
>                                                      Cliff, W7VVA
I agree with Cliff's reply but this will give you a combination of the
following-
1) Galactic noise - dependent on the apparent sky-brightness at the
frequency of interest, and also on where the antenna is pointing eg if
pointing horizontally half the forward lobe sees the ground at 300k, the
other half the sky which can be anywhere from 3k to 10^6k dependent on
frequency. For analysis see TASO report for the FCC.
2) Atmospheric noise - varies throughout the world with time of day and
seasons of the year, below 20mc/s this is the dominating factor at quiet
receiving sites. For analysis see CCIR report 322 Geneva.
3) Man-made Noise - varies greatly on the siting of the antenna and the
environment. Often below atmospheric and cosmic noise at quiet sites.
However in many locations radiation from badly designed or poorly
screened electrical equipment will raise this level considerably.

Atmospheric noise is isotropic, antenna directivity will have very
little effect on the received noise power.  Improvement in signal/noise
ratio can be obtained with high directivity towards the wantd signal.

For further reading see:
Antenna Engineering Handbook: Johnson and Jasik Chapter 29.
Antennas: John D Kraus Chapter 17
Radio Astronomy: John D Kraus various references.
Exploration of Space: Sir Bernard Lovell Chapter 2

Hope this is of help.  If you need any further advice please contact us.
Mandy
(Replying on behalf of my husband, Tim (G1BCR / G9BZW), who hates computers
despite (or maybe because of) being a practising RF Engineer.)
Sussex  UK


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:58 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!uwm.edu!homer.alpha.net!news.mixcom.com!usenet
From: "Richard C. Webb" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Antenna Temperature
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 15:31:17 -0600
Organization: Webb Laboratories
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial43-23.mixcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b7 (Win95; I)
To: [e-mail]

chong kwan meng wrote:
>
> I am a new-comer in the field of antenna design. There is one parameter
> which I do not quite understand: Antenna Temperature. According to
> books, the Antenna Temperature a measurement of the cosmatic noise,
> other noises in the earth and the antenna rediation pattern. My question
> is : How do measure this Antenna Temperature. Is there anybody out there
> can give me some advice?
>
> Best Regards,
>
> K.M Chong

This is a very much misunderstood parameter, defined implicitly as
follows:

The noise density that an antenna can deliver to a matched load is kT
dBm/Hz, where

        k = Boltzman's constant
        T = defined antenna temperature

T = nTs + (1-n)Ta, where

        n  = antenna ohmic efficiency (not aperture efficiency)
        Ts = average background (or sky) temperature over the antenna pattern -
deg K
        Ta = physical antenna temperature - deg K

This is detailed in chapter 8 of ANTENNA ENGINEERING by W. L. Weeks,
McGraw-Hill, 1968.

Note - ohmic efficiency is near 1.0 for metal antennas (typical
parabolic devices, etc.)


Note that the nTs term can be very low and can be swamped out by the
(1-n)Ta term, hence the need to cool the antenna itself.

Note - I presented this in detail during my four-hour Systems &
Receivers Workshop at the 1993 Wireless Symposium in San Jose and on
several occasions since.


Please see the Webb Laboratories RF/Microwave/Wireless CAE site:

        http://www.webblabs.com


Richard C. Webb, P.E.


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:16:59 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Any feedback on cellular phone antenna extensions?
Date: 27 Oct 1996 16:33:26 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 4
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <550kf6$[e-mail]>
References: <550cds$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

See Cohen, Spring 1996 (Comm.Quart's 'Antennae Exotica' column)) on the
'Patch Antenna' for cellular and elsewhere.

Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:00 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.structured.net!crusty.teleport.com!nntp0.teleport.com!ip-pdx02-15
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Any feedback on cellular phone antenna extensions?
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 96 11:11:08 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <5524cf$[e-mail]>
References: <550cds$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx02-15.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <550cds$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (ATTA2) wrote:
>Has anybody used those portable cellular phone antenna extensions that are
>supposed to increase your range and reception?  Did they help and are they
>worth buying?  Appreciate any feedback.

If you're talking about the "passive repeater" gadgets, basically an
antenna inside the car connected to one outside but not physically
connected to the phone, they don't do anything. I measured a couple of
brands on a professional antenna range set up for this kind of measurement,
and found only very slight changes in a couple of the pattern nulls
when the gadget was installed. Even moving the rear view mirror had as much
effect, and moving the passenger seat had a great deal more.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:00 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.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] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Any feedback on cellular phone antenna extensions?
Date: 29 Oct 1996 08:25:56 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 13
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <5550l4$[e-mail]>
References: <5524cf$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

The 'patch' antenna (a misnomer of a trademark because microstrip 'patch'
antennas have been around long before)is a decent,3 dB gain  parisitic.
Needless to say, it doesn't do wonders for your omni pattern and is
unrealisable in a moving vehicle or for anyone with an (occassionally)
moving head with phone attached. An expensive alternative to something you
can make yourself with a piece of 3 inch wire.

Get the antenna OUTSIDE on the ROOF or  (rear) HOOD of the car and off the
darn window... That way the coax doesn't act like a counterpoise and the
antenna may realize some ground-plane gain.

73
Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:01 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!news.voicenet.com!netnews.upenn.edu!news.misty.com!news.ipass.net![e-mail]
From: David Cooley <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Anyone know this 2m antenna?
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 17:26:54 -0600
Organization: IPass.net
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: customs12.ipass.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Hello all,
Wondering if anyone has the plans for or knows where I can get them (I
lost them).  It's a 2m vertical made from a 10 foot section of
galvanized EMT conduit, uses a section of 1/8" brazing rod for a driven
element, supported between the halves of a PVC pipe tee and has 4 ground
radials... Any info would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Dave

--
========================================================================
David Cooley                AKA N5XMT                 [e-mail]
http://www.ipass.net/~cooldave/
Sponges grow in the ocean... Wonder how deep it would be if they didn't!
========================================================================


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:02 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: [e-mail] (David Copperhead)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Anzac TP-101 Balun
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 02:26:41 GMT
Organization: ...
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <3276bb3c.9439043@204.127.3.4>
References: <3271498a.2910103@204.127.3.4> <3276aceb.5773432@204.127.3.4> <3276aec6.6248526@204.127.3.4>
Reply-To: 127.0.0.10
NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.cambridge-1.ma.dial-access.att.net
X-No-Archive: Yes
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.electronics.design:24163 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30691


Has anybody used a TP-101 balun ?

Anzac TP-101 Balun
 pin 1,3, 5 --Ground
pin 2 - 50 ohm unbalance
pin 4 -  balance port
pin 6-  balance port

Will this balun balance any impedance out to 50 ohms...or is there a
ratio?



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:03 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!newshost.convex.com!news.onramp.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: ATV 420/430 Mhz receive beam antenna?
Date: 21 Oct 1996 16:08:23 GMT
Organization: OnRamp Technologies; ISP;  Dallas/Ft Worth/Houston, TX USA
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <54g75n$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hou20.onramp.net
X-Newsreader: AIR News 3.X (SPRY, Inc.)

Does anyone has any drwaings on a good, easy to build ATV
receive beam antenna for 420/430 Mhtz.

Please e-mail: [e-mail]
or post here.

Thank you.

73

Paolo - KC5VPV




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:04 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.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] (K8VSJ)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Beam for the 440 band [70cm]
Date: 23 Oct 1996 10:46:44 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 2
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54lb4k$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (K8VSJ)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I would like to have drawing foe a 4 el end mounted beam for 440 mhz
K8VSJ


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:04 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-9.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!insnet.net!news.insnet.net!news.nacamar.de!uunet!in2.uu.net!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: BEST ANT BOOK FOR THE $$$$$
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 20:07:33 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 144.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

$10 Amatuer Radio Vertical Antenna Handbook   by Capt Paul
H. Lee N6PL is the best written book explaining the more
complex aspects of antennas . He quotes JASIK ,BROWN et al.
 He goes after idiots who say a .5w needs no radials, he
explains TRAPS are really just tank circuits, he explains
how to tune a 80m vert for the whole band, He puts down horiz
HF antennas !! Says verts outperform them . He does a .56w(20M),
.3w(40M) and .16w(75M) HF antennas .
  BEST $10 ever spent.


______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:05 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!newshub.tc.umn.edu!newsstand.tc.umn.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Beverage feedline question
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 04:15:04 GMT
Organization: University of Minnesota
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <556dne$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: pub-18-b-154.dialup.umn.edu
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

10/28/96

I am putting up a short Beverage and have a question about the
feedline.  I will be using RG6 with it's double shielding.  My
question has to do with using a current balun on the end of the
line where it connects to the Beverage.  The feedline will run
very close to a radial for about 40 feet.  Should I put the
balun at the point where the feedline connects to the Beverage,
or should I put the balun out where the feedline starts to run next
to the radial?  Also, I plan on using a balun made of 6 turns of
the feedline on a 3 inch PVC form.  Will that work or should I
use ferrite toroids or get a current balun instead?  All help
will be appreciated as this is my first attempt at a Beverage.
Thanks much.   73/DX   Henry  WA0GOZ

Without CW it's just CB!!



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:06 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!quagga.ru.ac.za!giraffe.ru.ac.za!psam
From: [e-mail] (MR A MULDER)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Birds on the Beam
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 13:18:37 GMT
Organization: Rhodes University, Grahamstown, 6140.
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb064$2e30f840$70c32ace@redoutey> <53q3nk$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54cnf7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: psy03.psycho.ru.ac.za

In article <54cnf7$[e-mail]> [e-mail](Antho
ny Severdia) writes:
>From: [e-mail](Anthony Severdia)
>Subject: Re: Birds on the Beam
>Date: 20 Oct 1996 08:21:59 GMT

>In <[e-mail]> Ramon Gandia
><[e-mail]> writes:
>>
>>> Shaw48195 wrote:
>>>
>>> SOLUTION: KEY UP WITH 2,000 WATTS AND THE BIRDS WILL FLY AWAY!
>>
>>Maybe not.  At WKVM, with 25 kilowatts (two towers), the black
>>birds would perch on top of the towers...

>    Ramon ...many chuckles here! <g>  Perhaps the frequency was not
>right, eh?

>    I can tell you and anyone reading that 50-100KW on sterba curtains
>has no birds perching anywhere, even when close to an estuary where sea
>gulls prevail.

>    Also, the same holds true in a site I know intimately that is home
>to four 50KW+ ERP FM stations, save this at 1000 ft near the ocean.
>Also, no ants, rodents or other animals nearby other than rattle snakes
>and small worms.

>    Interesting?  I dunno ...just more observations, leading to
>folklore (maybe).

>    -=Tony=-    San Francisco, CA

Hay, remember seagulls  only listern too stations transmitting Beachboys
music.


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:07 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!netnews.nwnet.net!news.u.washington.edu!news.alt.net!news1.alt.net!news.aa.net!ratty.wolfe.net!usenet
From: Ramon Gandia <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Birds on the Beam
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 01:24:35 -0800
Organization: Anvil Technology
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbb064$2e30f840$70c32ace@redoutey> <53q3nk$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54cnf7$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: nome-ts1-p01.nome.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

MR A MULDER wrote:
>
> Hay, remember seagulls  only listern too stations
> transmitting Beachboys music.

I knew it!  I knew it!  This was back in 1961-63, and
sure enough, WKVM played the Beach Boys.

California Girls, Surfing Safari.....

--
In order to foil SpamBots, my e-mail address is not
machine readable.  Please reply to address below:

Ramon Gandia,    Nome, Alaska  |    rfg.at.nome.dot.net
AL7X          S/V Seven Stars  |
907-443-2437 fax [phone]  | where at=@  dot=period


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:09 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!news.mr.net!news.Spacestar.COM!news
From: "glenn schultz" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.space,rec.radio.b
Subject: Re: CASH FOR RADIO SUPPLIES
Date: 30 Oct 1996 02:52:15 GMT
Organization: Spacestar Communications, Minneapolis, MN, USA
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <01bbc607$6bddf680$2993dccc@default>
References: <01bbc483$d2664c20$8c74d4cd@default>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tc12-16.msp.spacestar.net
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30717 rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors:296 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:19846 rec.radio.amateur.dx:1164 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41405 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20590 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117195 rec.radio.amateur.policy:42413 rec.radio.amateur.space:8678

Conrad R. Dery, Jr. <[e-mail]> wrote in article
<01bbc483$d2664c20$8c74d4cd@default>...
> Take a few minutes and read this.  It could change your life!!!!
>
> This is your chance to earn BIG BUCKS
>
> This is for real....no gimmicks!!!
>
> I read this article from a news group telling me I could make $50,000.00
in
<snip>

Conrad,
Do you realize that this scheme is called Wire Fraud and Mail Fraud? Most
everyone else does that reads this crap. ESPECIALLY with such a misleading
title and the fact that it was cross-posted to 10 different NG's! A message
has been sent to your ISP notifying them of your actions, along with copies
to the FCC and US Postal Service. KEEP THIS CRAP OUT OF OUR NEWS-GROUPS!
--
Glenn Schultz
10X 68391
N0VYK

interNET       ==>>  [e-mail]
packetNET   ==>>  [e-mail]

Check out the Ionospheric Protection League
Amateur and Antique Radio Homepage
==>>   http://www.spacestar.net/users/glenn/index.html




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:10 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax as a balanced feeder?
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 09:15:56 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <54eltj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.122.137
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:
> There is NO DIFFERENCE between using the coax and using a twisted pair or
> a bifilar winding through the cores, that's why I use two centers out of
> teflon RG-58 through a stack of large diameter cores.

Hi Tom, functionally, it seems the above is not different from running
300 ohm ladder-line through a number of single-turn cores. When you
say "two centers" above, is that with or without the braid? If you
spaced those "two centers" far apart enough to get 300 ohms
characteristic impedance, how far apart would the turns have to be?
Does your "two centers" avoid the problem of finding thermaleze wire?

Did you hear about the guy using 300 ohm twin-lead for the coil on
a base loaded vertical?

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


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:11 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.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] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax as a balanced feeder?
Date: 23 Oct 1996 11:28:34 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 26
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54ldj2$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

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

>
>Please help me out here a little. are you saying that the proposition
that
>the two
>coax lines could be physically separated won't work? As noted, I seem to
>recall the
>original author making that claim. Also as noted, I haven't tried this
>antenna - only
>stored the article in my "fascinating" file.
>
>Thanks and 73,
>
>Marty

Hi Marty,

No, the cables can be separated. But it is an absolute requirement they
have the shields connected at both ends.

All bets are off if the line carries significant common mode current. In
that case, you'd have a mess with separated cables.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:13 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.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: Coax as a balanced feeder?
Date: 22 Oct 1996 17:15:55 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 31
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54jdib$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Cecil,

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

>Hi Tom, functionally, it seems the above is not different from running
>300 ohm ladder-line through a number of single-turn cores. When you
>say "two centers" above, is that with or without the braid?

No braid.

>If you
>spaced those "two centers" far apart enough to get 300 ohms
>characteristic impedance, how far apart would the turns have to be?

I never worried about it Cecil, so I don't know. Standard transmission
line formulas would apply or be very close unless the wire was spaced
wider than the distance it is away from the cores, you don't want core
material to be in the differential mode fields any more than necessary.

>Does your "two centers" avoid the problem of finding thermaleze wire?

Don't know what that is. I use it because it has high voltage and
temperature breakdown and is weater proof.

>Did you hear about the guy using 300 ohm twin-lead for the coil on
>a base loaded vertical?

No, as a stub? It would be pretty lossy compared to a good coil.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:14 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!ais.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-8.sprintlink.net!interpath!news.interpath.net!news.interpath.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Curt Phillips)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax as a balanced feeder?
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 22:15:48 GMT
Organization: Mystic Knights of the Sea
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <54rdmc$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: cphillips.pdial.interpath.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Marty Gulseth <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Greg Newberry wrote:
>> I want to put up an antenna using balanced feeders but getting them in
>> the house isn't an options. Metal roof, metal siding, patio's, etc. A
>> few years back I remember an article using 2 equal runs of very low loss
>> coax to act as a balanced feed system for an antenna.
>I *might* still have a copy of the original article. Mid 70's "73 Mag" as I r
ecall. Let
>me know if you are interested. The concept fascinated me also, but I HAVE NOT
 tried this
>setup (yet.)  By the way, the author also claimed much higher immunity to loc
al noise due
>to the coax shielding. YMMV.
>>  How would you handle the braid? Tie together at each end and ground the
>> transmitter end?
>As I recall, the author tied the braid together on one end only. Connected th
e tied
>together braids to ground at the station (tuner) end.
>>  What would be the impedance of something like this?
>I struggled with this for a long time, then finally drew a "schematic" of the
 compound

  I'd like to add my $.02 (probably about what it is worth :-).

  I've read about such a configuration, but the impedance mentioned in the
book or article (I don't remember where I read it) was much different that
anyone else here has mentioned.

  The theory that I read said that, with the coax shields grounded and tied
together, that the "twin lead conductors" (i.e., the two center conductors
of the two pieces of coax) would appear (electrically) to be infinitely far
apart.  Therefore, the impedance would be the same as a ladder line or
twin-lead with, say 20 foot spacing between their conductors.  Therefore,
it seems as though they were claiming an impedance of 1000 ohms, or
something in that range... something appropriate for "ladder line" with
extremely wide spacing.

  It seemed logical when I read it (which probably why I still remember
it), but it's interesting that no one else here seems to agree with that
theory.  Perhaps the author was very wrong, but it "sounded" good.  :-)
(Never let actual radio theory interfere with a good sounding explanation?
:-)

  Anyway, I'm interested in comments.  I've never used two coaxes this way
either, but as a proponent and user of ladder line, someday I may.

=========== Opinions expressed are solely those of the author ==========
Curt Phillips, CEM KD4YU (ex-WB4LHI)  | They that can give up essential
Engineer/Writer/Adventurer/Raconteur  | liberty to obtain a little
Chairman, Tar Heel Scanner/SWL Group  | temporary safety deserve neither
ARRL Life; QCWA; Raleigh ARS; NRA; AEE|liberty nor safety. -Ben Franklin
==== [e-mail] ====== [Copyright 1996 All rights reserved]====



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:15 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax as a balanced feeder?
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 16:56:56 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <3270f616.999195@10.0.2.1>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.102.182
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

JF wrote:
> If you have two pieces of parallel coax the impedance will be half of
> the original coax not twice.

Hi Jim, seems to be a semantic problem. The "parallel coax" conductors
in a balanced transmission line are in series so the impedances add.

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


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:16 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!usenet
From: "Chuck (Jack) Hawley" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax as a balanced feeder?
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 21:45:18 -0500
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54rdmc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: istanbul-4.slip.uiuc.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I)

Curt Phillips wrote:

>   The theory that I read said that, with the coax shields grounded and tied
> together, that the "twin lead conductors" (i.e., the two center conductors
> of the two pieces of coax) would appear (electrically) to be infinitely far
> apart.  Therefore, the impedance would be the same as a ladder line or
> twin-lead with, say 20 foot spacing between their conductors.  Therefore,
> it seems as though they were claiming an impedance of 1000 ohms, or
> something in that range... something appropriate for "ladder line" with
> extremely wide spacing.
>
>   It seemed logical when I read it (which probably why I still remember
> it), but it's interesting that no one else here seems to agree with that
> theory.  Perhaps the author was very wrong, but it "sounded" good.  :-)
> (Never let actual radio theory interfere with a good sounding explanation?

Think about it, if the impedance from the first one is 50 ohms to the
shield and the shields are tied together and the impedance from the
shield to the second one is 50 ohms.......

Chuck, KE9UW



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:17 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!mathserv.mps.ohio-state.edu!news.physics.uiowa.edu!news.uiowa.edu!news
From: "William E. Sabin" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax as a balanced feeder?
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 07:10:09 -0700
Organization: none
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54rdmc$[e-mail]> <[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)

Consider two coaxes whose braids are joined together along their lengths.
The generator and load are connected to the two center leads and the
braids float (not grounded).

For each coax the value of Z0 = sqrt(L/C). For the pair of coaxes the two
C's are in series so that the total capacitance is C/2. The L's are also
in series so that the total inductance is L*2.

The new Z0' = sqrt(4*L/C) = 2*Z0.

Bill W0IYH


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:18 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-4.sprintlink.net!demos!news.stealth.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: Coax as a balanced feeder?
Date: 26 Oct 1996 10:34:47 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 44
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54t7i7$[e-mail]>
References: <54rdmc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <54rdmc$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Curt
Phillips) writes:

>
>  The theory that I read said that, with the coax shields grounded and
tied
>together, that the "twin lead conductors" (i.e., the two center
conductors
>of the two pieces of coax) would appear (electrically) to be infinitely
far
>apart.  Therefore, the impedance would be the same as a ladder line or
>twin-lead with, say 20 foot spacing between their conductors.  Therefore,
>it seems as though they were claiming an impedance of 1000 ohms, or
>something in that range... something appropriate for "ladder line" with
>extremely wide spacing.
>
>

The center conductor only interacts with the shield, and the shield
interacts with the outside world. If the center is excited and the shield
is floated, the effect is almost exactly the same as if you were feeding
the shields. So if the shields float the line looks FAT and as if it had
the physical spacing of the shields.

If the shields are connected at each end normal transmission line type
currents (differential mode) cancel on the outside of the shields, all
transmission current stays inside each cable, and the impedance is the sum
of the two cables. Loss remains fixed at the value of one cable alone. (If
the SWR is unity in both cases.)

Common mode (unwanted parallel) currents flow down the outside of the
shields and radiate, just as from open wire line. So having the shield
does not help this problem.

A second way it would work is if the  coupling (by electromagnectic or
induction fields) between the cables is very very high and there is no
space difference between them to cause time delays.

The common mode surge impedance is the effective diameter of the two outer
shields, and is affected by line spacing. But it only concerns common mode
signals. The differential mode impedance (as a balanced line) is the sum
of the two lines.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:20 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.stealth.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!interpath!news.interpath.net!news.interpath.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Curt Phillips)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax as a balanced feeder?
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 01:58:26 GMT
Organization: Mystic Knights of the Sea
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <54u1js$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54rdmc$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: cphillips.pdial.interpath.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

"Chuck (Jack) Hawley" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Curt Phillips wrote:
>>   The theory that I read said that, with the coax shields grounded and tied
>> together, that the "twin lead conductors" (i.e., the two center conductors
>> of the two pieces of coax) would appear (electrically) to be infinitely far
>> apart.  Therefore, the impedance would be the same as a ladder line or
>> twin-lead with, say 20 foot spacing between their conductors.  Therefore,
>> it seems as though they were claiming an impedance of 1000 ohms, or
>> something in that range... something appropriate for "ladder line" with
>> extremely wide spacing.
>>   It seemed logical when I read it (which probably why I still remember
>> it), but it's interesting that no one else here seems to agree with that
>> theory.  Perhaps the author was very wrong, but it "sounded" good.  :-)
>> (Never let actual radio theory interfere with a good sounding explanation?
>Think about it, if the impedance from the first one is 50 ohms to the
>shield and the shields are tied together and the impedance from the
>shield to the second one is 50 ohms.......

  But (just to advance the discussion, not because I'm going to "fall on my
sword" for this theory, but to make sure it is given a "fair" analysis)...

  the radio never sees the shield.  I'm talking about a situation where
both center conductors are connected to the balanced input of a radio or
tuner, and the two shields are connected together and grounded, but not
connected to the radio in any way.
  So the radio never sees the shield(s), never "knows" that they are there
and doesn't care.  All the radio/tuner sees is two (hopefully) balanced
wires which evidence some characteristic impedance, an impedance which is
normally determined by their distance apart.  Since each of these two lines
are "totally isolated" from each other (within the limits of practicality),
they are "worlds apart" and their impedance is correspondingly high.

  Maybe.  :-)

========== Opinions expressed are solely those of the author ===========
Curt Phillips KD4YU (ex-WB4LHI)   |  "It's wondrous out here, with
Engineer/Writer/Double Naught Spy | treasures to satiate desires, both
Chairman, Tar Heel Scanner/SWL Grp| subtle and gross.  But it's not
ARRL Life; QCWA; Raleigh ARS; NRA | for the timid."- "Q" on the universe
==== [e-mail] ====== [Copyright 1996 All rights reserved]====




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:21 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax as a balanced feeder?
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 12:55:43 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54rdmc$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 140.los-angeles-007.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

William E. Sabin wrote:
>
> Consider two coaxes whose braids are joined together along their lengths.
> The generator and load are connected to the two center leads and the
> braids float (not grounded).
>
> For each coax the value of Z0 = sqrt(L/C). For the pair of coaxes the two
> C's are in series so that the total capacitance is C/2. The L's are also
> in series so that the total inductance is L*2.
>
> The new Z0' = sqrt(4*L/C) = 2*Z0.
>
> Bill W0IYH

altavoz: At the risk of wasting NG bw , I must thank you for
this tutorial , its one of the best i've seen , THANK YOU.
SIMPLE,CLEAR,WELL STATED...
--

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:22 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax as a balanced feeder?
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 12:50:50 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54u1js$[e-mail]> <554725$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 140.los-angeles-007.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

W8JI Tom wrote:
>
> In article <54u1js$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Curt
> Phillips) writes:
>
> > Since each of these two lines
> >are "totally isolated" from each other (within the limits of
> practicality),
> >they are "worlds apart" and their impedance is correspondingly high.
> >
> >  Maybe.  :-)
> >
> >
>
> Nope, not at all. It "sees" the surge impedance total of both lines. Thank
> goodness, because it's damn hard to feed the infinite impedance you're
> trying to create!
>
> Anyway, the two line are not totally isolated from each other, because the
> shields are common.
>
> Now here's the kicker for all the "it takes two wire" enthusists. A single
> wire has finite surge impedance without any second conductor. So even a
> single wire floating out in space isn't an infinite impedance transmission
> line. Come to thing of it, neither is space itself.
>
> 73 Tom


altavoz: Well stated ,  TOM .

I like the one in the ARRL HB explaining WG as balanced
line supported on stubs and where everyone gets confused is
where the H field of the stubs suddenly points in the
direction of propagation.
Single connductor xmission lines (WG) must have at least one
( H or E field) pointing in the direction of propagation.
All coax and twin lead in fund mode has both H,E
transverse "Tem"

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:24 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!panix!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.structured.net!crusty.teleport.com!nntp0.teleport.com!ip-pdx10-13
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax as a balanced feeder?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 96 02:20:13 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <556e13$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54rdmc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx10-13.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <54rdmc$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Curt Phillips) wrote:

>  The theory that I read said that, with the coax shields grounded and
tied
>together, that the "twin lead conductors" (i.e., the two center conductors
>of the two pieces of coax) would appear (electrically) to be infinitely
far
>apart.  Therefore, the impedance would be the same as a ladder line or
>twin-lead with, say 20 foot spacing between their conductors.  Therefore,
>it seems as though they were claiming an impedance of 1000 ohms, or
>something in that range... something appropriate for "ladder line" with
>extremely wide spacing.

>. . .

With the coax shields tied together, the center conductor-center conductor
impedance is twice the impedance of a single coax line. In this case, the
two cables are effectively in series. If you connect the center conductors
together, the impedance from the center conductors to the shield is 1/2 the
impedance of a single coax line. Here, they're in parallel.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:25 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.ultranet.com!iag.net!news.magicnet.net!feed1.news.erols.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: William Cann <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Coax Question
Date: 29 Oct 1996 18:38:52 GMT
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <555ivs$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.116.65.99
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22ATT (Windows; U; 16bit)
To: All

I have a roll of coax stamped "CG 92 H/U".  I cant seem to find
anything about it on material I have on hand.  Does anyone know
the specs on it?
ie: impedence, loss/100ft and freq limits?

Thanks



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:26 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.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: Contrawound Toroidal Helical Antenna (CTHA)
Date: 29 Oct 1996 01:33:51 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 29
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <5548gf$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <[e-mail]>, "C.D.Sage" <[e-mail]>
writes:

>Greetings,
> I posted to this group a while back regarding the Contrawound Toroidal
>Helical Antenna and promised to keep those interested in it's development

>updated. Attached is a recent news release that you may find of interest.

> Regards,
> C.D.Sage
>
>

Actually we shouldn't laugh at these antennas. Even the military uses
them.

For example, CIA sponsored rebels from Nicarauga have wound THA antennas
around the old broken crosses suspending bent wires across fields of
graveyards.

It's the best of all worlds, they call them Contra-wound cross-field
fractal THA antennas. They have 20 dB gain over Batwing dipoles, and work
so well they can communicate with spirits in orbit over graveyards halfway
around the world.

Science is dying, Vamboo Rules (Alex Harvey, 1972).

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:27 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!panix!newsfeed.internetmci.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: Contrawound Toroidal Helical Antenna (CTHA)
Date: 29 Oct 1996 11:08:37 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 53
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <555a65$[e-mail]>
References: <554oac$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (K1BQT)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Greetings--

I took some time to re-read Jennison's (G2AJV) article on the "Maxwell
Displacement Current" antenna (Comm Quarterly Summer '95).  Although the
theoretical description was interesting, I couldn't really follow it
(possibly a function of my less-than-total understanding of magnetic wave
theory).  However, the article then took a giant and, I'm afraid,
all-too-common leap of faith--from a somewhat ofuscated theoretcial
discussion to a description of several "top-of-the-kitchen-table" homebrew
antennas that "worked".

On the flip side, the article lacked any hard data to confirm that
radiation was actually occuring as a result of the claimed "displacement
field" (I'm not sure how you divorce a virtual construct like a
displacement field from the overall phenomenon of electro-magnetic
radiation).  Nor are the operating characteristics and parameters of the
antenna profiled in other than a very general and subjective way.
Further, while there were field strength measurements made with and
without a ATU in the line, there were no field strength measurements made
relative to a referrence dipole or other referrenced source.
Consequently, we are left with no idea whatsoever as to the relative (or
actual) efficiency of these antennas---other than the author's subjective
concusion that they do NOT match the performance of a good external
antenna at HF.  In other words, the operating characteristics of the
antenna--as a class of antenna--were not scientifically explored or
documented.  No network analyzers, current probes, field-strength meters,
antenna ranges or anechoic chambers.  This is not to put down Mr. Jennison
in any way--he never claimed to be doing serious science.

The same must be said of the press release on the CTHA.  The description
of the antenna's performance was totally subjective because no hard
comparative data against a known referrence was provided to us (at least I
didn't see any comparative numbers against that turnstyle in terms of uV
or dBm).  Consequently, we have no idea how, why, or even (quantitatively)
IF the antenna really works very well at all.

As a young physics student in high school, I recall being lectured at
length on the virtues of gathering accurate data and presenting it clearly
before drawing conlusions in my lab reports.  This training served me well
in college--and later in grad school.  I realize amateur radio is not NSF
funded, and we DO have the luxury of meditating the mantra "it's only a
hobby--it's only a hobby".  However, when it comes to antennas, saying
"it's so" doesn't make it so.  And there seems to be a lot of that going
around!

Consequently, when it comes to the CTHA or any other "too good to be true"
innovation, I retain the right to both curiosity and skepticism.  And, I
for one, am not going to accept anyone's invitation to shut the F*** up
until I see explainations and data that (a.) honestly document the claims
being made, and (b.) make at least some smattering of sense in terms of
the known physical universe.
Rick  K1BQT



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:28 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.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] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Contrawound Toroidal Helical Antenna (CTHA)
Date: 29 Oct 1996 06:03:40 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 6
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <554oac$[e-mail]>
References: <5548gf$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Gee Tom, you just HAVE to get your 'fractal fix'.

Didn't someone already to tell you to "SHUT THE F**K UP"?--and it wasn't
me.

Take it off the newsgroup as suggested.


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:29 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Contrawound Toroidal Helical Antenna (CTHA)
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 12:26:29 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <5548gf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 140.los-angeles-007.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

W8JI Tom wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, "C.D.Sage" <[e-mail]>
> writes:
>
> >Greetings,
> > I posted to this group a while back regarding the Contrawound Toroidal
> >Helical Antenna and promised to keep those interested in it's development
>
> >updated. Attached is a recent news release that you may find of interest.
>
> > Regards,
> > C.D.Sage
> >
> >
>
> Actually we shouldn't laugh at these antennas. Even the military uses
> them.
>
> For example, CIA sponsored rebels from Nicarauga have wound THA antennas
> around the old broken crosses suspending bent wires across fields of
> graveyards.
>
> It's the best of all worlds, they call them Contra-wound cross-field
> fractal THA antennas. They have 20 dB gain over Batwing dipoles, and work
> so well they can communicate with spirits in orbit over graveyards halfway
> around the world.
>
> Science is dying, Vamboo Rules (Alex Harvey, 1972).
>
> 73 Tom


altavoz: I like that !! Most brilliant piece of WWW humor ever.
--

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:30 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Contrawound Toroidal Helical Antenna (CTHA)
Date: 29 Oct 1996 18:03:42 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 10
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <5562ge$[e-mail]>
References: <555k43$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Tom, you really need to get a life.

Go explore your 'magic' elsewhere.

The newsgroup is sick of you harping on this and I have been very
forthcoming in answering questions via e-mail. So take the admonitions of
OTHERS--they're sick of your prattle. ANd there's hours of answers
already.

Chip


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:31 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!arclight.uoregon.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: Contrawound Toroidal Helical Antenna (CTHA)
Date: 29 Oct 1996 13:58:11 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 72
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <555k43$[e-mail]>
References: <554oac$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <554oac$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Fractenna) writes:

>Gee Tom, you just HAVE to get your 'fractal fix'.
>Take it off the newsgroup as suggested.

No thanks,  I'd rather discuss why antennas like these are created in the
first place, because they eventually rob innocent people of time and
money. Readers trying to learn, builders trying to put up a better
antenna, investors trying to build money for retirement, and sometimes
even the government wastes money on technical jibberish like this.

No author, you included Chip, ever seriously discusses HOW these things
perform the "magic" feats of radiation. They never answer a direct
question. Instead they go through a pattern like this:

1.) Ignore specific questions

2.) Claim any answer would violate some secretive area of science

3.) Attempt to make the questioner go away by assigning busy work (like
reading other goofy articles)

4.) Intimidate anyone asking a question (as you did above)

With that in mind, I'd like to ask a serious question to anyone believing
in antennas like these.

We know with ANY antenna in the world, radiation is analyzed only by
considering charge movement and the effect of charge movement at a
distance through the phase delay of light speed. It is very plainly
written ( like in Generation of Electromagnetic Waves, Maxwells Equations
and Electromagnetic Waves, page 460 of Fundamentals of Electricity and
Magnetism (McGraw-Hill books) that only charge acceleration creates a
radiation field.

Suddenly we have a few "special" antennas, described in long conundrums,
that are alleged to ignore or break the rules. We no longer have to
accelerate charges in unison over a large linear spatial area, suddenly we
can do exactly the opposite.

Let's look at the small THA. Nearly equal charges accelerate around and
around, and when moving like that we always knew far field effects of
individual turns canceled. That's why we use them in small circuits...they
are "self-shielding". The only radiation effect is from fringing and NET
radiation currents caused by non-uniform current in the windings over the
area of the toroid, and any leads going to the toroids. If you look at the
polarization claimed for the CTHA, it fits this effect perfectly.

The small Fractal loop is the same way. It moves just as many charges one
way as it does another on a micro level. When we move equal charges
opposite directions, radiation effects cancel. The only radiation effect
is from the NET charge macro movement over the total spatial area, all the
little bends and folds do are add circuit type effects like resistance,
inductance, and capacitance to the antenna. As a matter of fact these
effects, present in both the CTHA and Fratal, are EXACTLY the OPPOSITE of
what we want in the areas they are added. They reduce radiation
resistance, while increasing loss resistance.

Both antennas waste physical space by causing needless current taper,
preventing maximum uniform charge acceleration as viewed from the
direction of desired radiation.

How then, do these antennas improve things by being "designed" contrary to
established rules?

For example, the Fratal loop claims higher radiation resistance, but it's
well established the highest radiation resistance always occurs when the
current is uniform and in phase over the largest spatial area. Where does
the data presented come from?

73, Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:33 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Contrawound Toroidal Helical Antenna (CTHA)
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 20:34:26 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <554oac$[e-mail]> <555k43$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 144.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

W8JI Tom wrote:
> but it's
> well established the highest radiation resistance always occurs when the
> current is uniform and in phase over the largest spatial area.
> 73, Tom

altavoz: So a larger diameter tube , at the middle of the .5wl pole
will increase radiation resistance ?

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:33 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-8.sprintlink.net!rain.fr!jussieu.fr!mathserv.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!netnews.nwnet.net!news-hub.interserv.net!news.sprynet.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Jim Sanborn)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Converting TV atenna to 2m
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 16:56:39 GMT
Organization: Sprynet News Service
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <54vslj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hd20-181.compuserve.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

I was told there was an article in QST which discussed adapting a TV
antenna to 2m, but I am unable to locate it. Does anyone know which
QST it is in? Maybe he meant a different mag (QEX, CQ, 73...).

Any info relating to this project would be greatly appreciated. Need
to get this taken care of B4 the snow flies.

THX



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:34 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!hearst.acc.Virginia.EDU!alison.sbc.edu!alison.sbc.edu!nntp
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Converting TV atenna to 2m
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: "Kenneth D. Grimm" <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 07:19:09 -0800
References: <54vslj$[e-mail]>
Organization: Sweet Briar College
Nntp-Posting-Host: ppp70.sbc.edu
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I; 16bit)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jim Sanborn <[e-mail]>
CC: [e-mail]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 20

Jim Sanborn wrote:
>
> I was told there was an article in QST which discussed adapting a TV
> antenna to 2m, but I am unable to locate it. Does anyone know which
> QST it is in? Maybe he meant a different mag (QEX, CQ, 73...).
>
> Any info relating to this project would be greatly appreciated. Need
> to get this taken care of B4 the snow flies.
>
> THXThe current, November 1996, issue has such an article in it.

73,

Ken
--
___________________________________________________________

       Kenneth D. Grimm                 K4XL
       [e-mail]
___________________________________________________________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:35 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: "DAVE ABSHIRE" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Converting TV atenna to 2m
Date: 27 Oct 1996 20:13:37 GMT
Organization: COMPUTER DIAGNOSTICS
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <01bbc443$542849c0$824692cf@default>
References: <54vslj$[e-mail]> <550cdo$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 130.orlando-007.fl.dial-access.att.net
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

Hey Jim
I think my antenna is already converted to 11 meter (CB)
It sure picks up my neighbor real well!!!!
                                Dave




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:36 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!news.alt.net!newspost1.alt.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (N1XYY)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Converting TV atenna to 2m
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 23:05:38 GMT
Organization: Nantucket.Net
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <550pje$[e-mail]>
References: <54vslj$[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

It is QST alright,  November Issue ......

[e-mail] (Jim Sanborn) wrote:

>I was told there was an article in QST which discussed adapting a TV
>antenna to 2m, but I am unable to locate it. Does anyone know which
>QST it is in? Maybe he meant a different mag (QEX, CQ, 73...).

>Any info relating to this project would be greatly appreciated. Need
>to get this taken care of B4 the snow flies.

>THX





From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:36 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!ais.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-8.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Bruce Talkington)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: CQ Zone
Date: 22 Oct 96 12:06:39 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

I realize this is probably not the proper place to post this message and
I promise not to do so again, but I need a little information PLEASE.
Wanting to try a little of the CQ Contest this weekend, I find myself
ignorant of which CQ Zone Alabama in located in. Can someone give a
little help on this? Certainly appreciate it.
73/Bruce..N4ZEZ
Andalusia, Alabama


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:37 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: Merv Stump <[e-mail]@postoffice.worldnet.att.net>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CQ Zone
Date: 22 Oct 1996 18:53:37 GMT
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <54j57h$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 228.new-york-011.ny.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)

AC6V has a homepage with all kinds of great information including CQ and
ITU zones.  URL is: http:pw2.netcom/~ac6v/index.html



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:38 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!node2.frontiernet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.rain.org!usenet
From: Larry Weaver <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CQ Zone
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 12:13:39 -0700
Organization: RAIN Public Access Internet (805) 967-RAIN
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: s14.term1.wlv.rain.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b6 (Win95; I)
To: Bruce Talkington <[e-mail]>

Alabama is in Zone 4. Have fun.

73, Larry N6TW

Bruce Talkington wrote:

<snip>
> Wanting to try a little of the CQ Contest this weekend, I find myself
> ignorant of which CQ Zone Alabama in located in. Can someone give a
> little help on this? Certainly appreciate it.
> 73/Bruce..N4ZEZ
> Andalusia, Alabama


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:39 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!nntp.uio.no!news.global-one.no!news1.transpac.net!news5.transpac.net!oden.abc.se!dos.canit.se!seunet!mn7.swip.net!mn6.swip.net!mn5.swip.net!news
From: Maude Schyffert <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CQ Zone
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 17:24:41 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup97-5-8.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 3.01b1Gold (Win16; I)

Bruce Talkington wrote:
>
> I realize this is probably not the proper place to post this message and
> I promise not to do so again, but I need a little information PLEASE.
> Wanting to try a little of the CQ Contest this weekend, I find myself
> ignorant of which CQ Zone Alabama in located in. Can someone give a
> little help on this? Certainly appreciate it.
> 73/Bruce..N4ZEZ
> Andalusia, Alabama
Ask any fellow ham.....SM0BKZ


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:40 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: RE: CTHA
Date: 27 Oct 1996 16:23:20 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 19
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <550js8$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I will not express an opinion on this antenna other than to say the only
thing I see that's even remotely new about  it  is the orthogonal windings
giving omni coverage. An 'eggbeater' does that, as does a split wire, etc.

Ask yourself the following:
1) Is it a RESONANT antenna?
1a) Is it an EFFICIENT antenna?
2) Is it a physically SMALL antenna?
3) Is it really anything different than an AM antenna on a ferrite rod?
4)Does it have an acceptable BANDWIDTH?

Where have its results been published (peer reviewed or not?) A: Nowhere.
What HAS been published? A: See Comm Quart Summer 95 --Jennison AND  Corum
1981 patent therein.
Where can I find out ANYTHING about the 'CTHA'?  : A:
http://www/cira/wvu/edu.

73 Chip
N1IR   .


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:41 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.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] (K1BQT)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CTHA
Date: 28 Oct 1996 00:12:17 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 19
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <551fbh$[e-mail]>
References: <5518e7$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (K1BQT)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

N1IR Writes:

I don't think the CTHA is 'bullsh&t' but I doubt its much good holding it
in your hand and using it on a satellite, as stated. Unlike some people,
however, I shall be a bit forgiving on the wording and assume what they
meant is they stuck it on top of a transceiver--and away from metal.

In Reply:  Perhaps my wording was a bit strong.  I know the CTHA isn't in
the same catagory as a dummy load and has some credibility as a radiator.
And, frankly, I've never built one, so I don't REALLY know whether they
work all that well or not.  However, the report left me with an impression
that, handheld, their model was performing equally to a externally-mounted
in-the-clear full-sized turnstyle or its equiv. That simply doesn't make
sense (or perhaps it speaks very well for the electronics in the bird with
which they are communicating).  I guess I'm just railing against what, at
first blush, appears to be an attack of magical thinking.  It might be
helpful to have more information.

Rick K1BQT


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:42 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.monmouth.com!news
From: Robert Bissett <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CTHA
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 19:42:10 -0400
Organization: Nov Schmoz Kapop
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <550js8$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp42.monmouth.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)

Fractenna wrote:
>
> I will not express an opinion on this antenna other than to say the only
> thing I see that's even remotely new about  it  is the orthogonal windings
> giving omni coverage. An 'eggbeater' does that, as does a split wire, etc.
>
> Ask yourself the following:
> 1) Is it a RESONANT antenna?
> 1a) Is it an EFFICIENT antenna?
> 2) Is it a physically SMALL antenna?
> 3) Is it really anything different than an AM antenna on a ferrite rod?
> 4)Does it have an acceptable BANDWIDTH?
>
> Where have its results been published (peer reviewed or not?) A: Nowhere.
> What HAS been published? A: See Comm Quart Summer 95 --Jennison AND  Corum
> 1981 patent therein.
> Where can I find out ANYTHING about the 'CTHA'?  : A:
> http://www/cira/wvu/edu.
>
> 73 Chip
> N1IR   .

There's a mistake in that http address. It's no good.

--
      *********
Bob Bissett      [e-mail]
      *********


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:42 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.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: CTHA
Date: 29 Oct 1996 01:48:24 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 29
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <5549bo$[e-mail]>
References: <551fbh$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <[e-mail]>, "C.D.Sage" <[e-mail]>
writes:

>Greetings,
> I posted to this group a while back regarding the Contrawound Toroidal
>Helical Antenna and promised to keep those interested in it's development

>updated. Attached is a recent news release that you may find of interest.

> Regards,
> C.D.Sage
>
>

Actually we shouldn't laugh at these antennas. Even the military uses
them.

For example, CIA sponsored rebels from Nicarauga have wound THA antennas
around the old broken crosses suspending bent wires across fields of
graveyards.

It's the best of all worlds, they call them Contra-wound cross-field
fractal THA antennas. They have 20 dB gain over Batwing dipoles, and work
so well they can communicate with spirits in orbit over graveyards halfway
around the world.

Science is dying, Vamboo Rules (Alex Harvey, 1972).

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:43 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!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] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CTHA
Date: 29 Oct 1996 05:46:25 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 3
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <554na1$[e-mail]>
References: <5549bo$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Oh, the ever-efferescent, Jolly Tom!

What a cut up!!


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:44 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!netaxs.com!sea.waterw.com!usenet
From: Ed Cregger <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Cushcraft ARX-6
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 04:31:24 -0500
Organization: Artisan Communications
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: access1.accsyst.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 looking for comments concerning the Cushcraft ARX-6 antenna. How
does it compare to the Diamond six meter vertical, how rugged is it and
so on. Your thoughts will be appreciated.

Ed Cregger, NM2K
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:46 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!dallasI5.dallas.net!news
From: Jim <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Cushcraft ARX-6
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 16:17:14 -0800
Organization: Jim
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: aux46.plano.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)
To: [e-mail]
CC: [e-mail]

Ed Cregger wrote:
 >
 > I am looking for comments concerning the Cushcraft ARX-6 antenna. How
 > does it compare to the Diamond six meter vertical, how rugged is it
and
 > so on. Your thoughts will be appreciated.
 >
 > Ed Cregger, NM2K
 > [e-mail]

We were disatisfied with it's performance until we added four 1/4 wave
ground radials beneath the 'maching ring'. At that point it becomes a
1/2 wave 'ground plane'. In actuality, the radials serve to decouple
the mast.

We operate several .5 MHz spaced repeaters with these antennas. In
close proximity with digital devices (PC's for instance) and even
one of those new florescent lamps with an AC-line frequency
converter produced intermodulation when the 6M xmtr came on the
air until we added the radials, thereby decoupling the RF from
the mast. Also loose hardware below the antenna used to produce
a lot of 'noise' until the radials were added.

It is a fairly rugged antenna. The only other change we made was to
add a radiator-style clamp near the top of the insulator - I once bought
a used AR6 out of west Texas and the center radiator had loosened up
probably due to wind. I now add it as a matter of standard practice.

A friend of mine evaluated the Diamond and sent it back. He is the
other of the 'we' I refer to.

Jim


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:47 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-stkh.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!nntp-oslo.UNINETT.no!nntp-trd.UNINETT.no!trhm2.or.uninett.no!oleea
From: [e-mail] (Ole Edvard Antonsen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Dipole impedance formula
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 22:01:14
Organization: orland.vgs.no
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: trhm2.or.uninett.no
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev A]

Do anybody have a formula for calculating the complex impedance in the
feed-point of a horizontale dipole as a function of the antenna-length
measured in wavelengths?

Ole Edvard - LC5EAT


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:48 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.stealth.net!newsfeed.uk.ibm.net!news-m01.ny.us.ibm.net!news-s01.ca.us.ibm.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail]   (Jon Schmidt)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Dipole impedance formula
Date: 24 Oct 1996 19:55:12 GMT
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <54ohj0$1fp8$[e-mail]>
References: <54oc1p$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip166-72-107-98.ct.us.ibm.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <54oc1p$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS) writes:
>
>[Ole Edvard Antonsen] says:
>>
>>Do anybody have a formula for calculating the complex impedance in the
>>feed-point of a horizontale dipole as a function of the antenna-length
>>measured in wavelengths?
>>
>>Ole Edvard - LC5EAT
>
>Ole,
>        See Johnson and Jasik "Radio Engineering Handbook" page 4-4
>and 4-5 for a simple method or Schekulnoff "Electro magnetic Waves"
>Chapter 11 for a more precise method.
>Charlie, W7XC

I assume you're looking for a quick and dirty method you can use with
a calculator and that you may not have easy access to the reference book
mentioned above.  The formulae below were not taken from the book
mentioned above, although they may be there (I don't have access to that
book).

Definitions:

W = wavelength (i.e. "Lambda")
L = total dipole length, in same units as W
d = dipole diameter, in same units as W
PI = 3.14159
B = PI*L/W = electrical length of L, in radians
LN() = Natural logarithm function
COT() - Cotangent function
** means raise the left operand to the right operand power

R = input resistance, in Ohms
X = input reactance, in Ohms

Z = input impedance = R + jX

For a short dipole (i.e. L < W/4) use:

R=20*(B**2)
X=-120*(LN(L/d)-1)/B


For a dipole around 1/2 wavelength (i.e. W/4 < L <= W/2) use:

R=24.7*(B**2.4)
X=-(120*(LN(L/d)-1)*COT(B))-.4456+(17.0082*B)-(8.6793*(B**2))+(9.6031*(B**3))


For a dipole around 5/8 wavelength (i.e W/4 < L <= 5W/8) use:

R=11.14*(B**4.17)
X=use the 1/2 wavelength formula, above.

Hope this helps.



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:50 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!metro.atlanta.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-10.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Dipole impedance formula
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 09:00:10 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <54orq1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.102.182
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

Tom Bruhns wrote:
> Maybe Cecil's method could be adjusted for different length/diameter
> ratios to make it more accurate.  I really don't want to put a wet
> blanket on the idea, but rather would like to see such an elegantly
> simple idea improved to match reality a bit better.

Hi Tom, sorry I didn't put any boundary conditions on it. Demon Rum
strikes again. I would have sworn the original poster was asking
about HF center-fed wire dipoles, like the G5RV. I should have said
I was talking about these kinds of wire antennas.

For a 102ft dipole on the HF bands, this method gives one some indication
of the approximate magnitudes of the resistance and reactance and of the
sign of the reactance. Fine tuning is usually easy after that.

thanks and 73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:50 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!cs.utexas.edu!ennfs.eas.asu.edu!news.asu.edu!aztec.asu.edu!hamop
From: [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Dipole impedance formula
Date: 24 Oct 1996 18:20:41 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <54oc1p$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aztec.asu.edu


[Ole Edvard Antonsen] says:
>
>Do anybody have a formula for calculating the complex impedance in the
>feed-point of a horizontale dipole as a function of the antenna-length
>measured in wavelengths?
>
>Ole Edvard - LC5EAT

Ole,
        See Johnson and Jasik "Radio Engineering Handbook" page 4-4
and 4-5 for a simple method or Schekulnoff "Electro magnetic Waves"
Chapter 11 for a more precise method.
Charlie, W7XC
--


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:51 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Dipole impedance formula
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 19:15:59 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54oc1p$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 102.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

CHARLES J. MICHAELS wrote:
>
> [Ole Edvard Antonsen] says:
> >
> >Do anybody have a formula for calculating the complex impedance in the
> >feed-point of a horizontale dipole as a function of the antenna-length
> >measured in wavelengths?
> >
> >Ole Edvard - LC5EAT

altavoz: You dont need that , its inductive til total length
is 1 wave , then capacitive after that but the lobe is
worthless beyond this, it split into 2 useless lobes .

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:52 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.indy.net!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [e-mail](Anthony Severdia)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Directional J-Pole
Date: 29 Oct 1996 00:33:19 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <553jcf$[e-mail]>
References: <553gqi$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sfo-ca9-14.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Mon Oct 28  6:33:19 PM CST 1996

In <553gqi$[e-mail]> David J. O'Connor <[e-mail]>
writes:
>
>Can a J-Pole used in a fixed location be made unidirectional by the
addition of a reflector and/or director elements? If so, what should
the element spacings  and lengths be for 146 and 223 MHz?
>
>David O'Connor
>W1WBZ
>Diamond Bar, CA
>

    Yes, in theory ...but: it would be a helluva lot easier to rotate
yagi beams to the vertical orientation.  Dual banding 146/223 is a
whole different situation.  No "magic" answers if that's what expected.

    -=Tony=-    W6ANV


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:53 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!atmnet.net!usenet
From: David J. O'Connor <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Directional J-Pole
Date: 28 Oct 1996 23:49:38 GMT
Organization: Pacific Scientific
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <553gqi$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.67.190.128
X-Newsreader: PROCOMM PLUS 3.0 for Windows

Can a J-Pole used in a fixed location be made unidirectional by the addition o
f a reflector and/or director elements? If so, what should the element spacing
s  and lengths be for 146 and 223 MHz?

David O'Connor
W1WBZ
Diamond Bar, CA



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:54 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!ifwtech.demon.co.uk!G3SEK
From: "Ian White, G3SEK" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Directional J-Pole
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 19:55:08 +0000
Organization: IFW Technical Services
Lines: 26
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <553gqi$[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 3.01 <9qI82xurdT5+zee3Wovwfh3yMs>

David J. O'Connor wrote:
>Can a J-Pole used in a fixed location be made unidirectional by the addition
of
>a reflector and/or director elements? If so, what should the element spacings

>and lengths be for 146 and 223 MHz?

Yes, it can be done - a British firm called J-Beam used to market TV
antennas working on that principle. A horizontal boom is mounted half-
way up the un-decoupled section, and the reflector and director are
attached as  usual. To put it another way, it's a 3-element yagi with
the driven element end-fed using a quarter-wave impedance transformer.

Any of the standard Handbook 3-element designs would do for the
reflector and director. It's going to squint in the vertical plane,
because all J-poles do, but you can minimize this by using a feedline
choke (coil of coax) and insulated boom mountings.

You'll probably have to experiment with the driven element length and
the tapping points on the trombone section.

The whole thing won't be very wonderful, but it should work after a
fashion.

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] Wed Oct 30 06:17:55 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.structured.net!crusty.teleport.com!nntp0.teleport.com!ip-pdx05-17
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Do antenna makers lie about their stats?
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 96 07:34:55 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <54htcp$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <540bbf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx05-17.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <540bbf$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jim Weir) wrote:
>. . .
>Most reputable manufacturers will give you the data that they took on that
>range and what the reference was -- dbi (db referenced to isotropic) or
dbd
>(db referenced to a standard dipole).

> . . .

As I've seen it used, dBd is gain referenced to a dipole in free space,
not to a "standard dipole". A common misconception is that it does refer
to a real dipole, rather than the fictitious construct of a dipole in
free space. It's a useful measure for some antennas, but inappropriate for
others. For example, it's easy to put a dipole up in the back yard that has
+4 dBd or more gain. A three-element Yagi, therefore, when mounted over
real ground, can have a gain of +10 dBd or greater. Just the other day I
saw some specs from a prominent antenna manufacturer that takes advantage
of this misunderstanding. Be careful when using dBd!

Roy Lewallen, W7EL



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:56 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc-e!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.structured.net!crusty.teleport.com!nntp0.teleport.com!ip-pdx12-31
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Do antenna makers lie about their stats?
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 96 02:59:14 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <54hd7t$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <540bbf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx12-31.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <540bbf$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jim Weir) wrote:
>. . .
>Most reputable manufacturers will give you the data that they took on that
>range and what the reference was -- dbi (db referenced to isotropic) or
dbd
>(db referenced to a standard dipole).

> . . .

As I've seen it used, dBd is gain referenced to a dipole in free space,
not to a "standard dipole". A common misconception is that it does refer
to a real dipole, rather than the fictitious construct of a dipole in
free space. It's a useful measure for some antennas, but inappropriate for
others. For example, it's easy to put a dipole up in the back yard that has
+4 dBd or more gain. A three-element Yagi, therefore, when mounted over
real ground, can have a gain of +10 dBd or greater. Just the other day I
saw some specs from a prominent antenna manufacturer that takes advantage
of this misunderstanding. Be careful when using dBd!

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:57 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!newspump.sol.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: Do antenna makers lie about their stats?
Date: 22 Oct 1996 08:04:21 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 3
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54id85$[e-mail]>
References: <54h3br$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

RE: Tom's 2 cents..

DUH!


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:58 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!demos!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Do antenna makers lie about their stats?
Date: 22 Oct 1996 11:19:57 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <54iakt$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

In article <[e-mail]>,
Monty Wilson  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>I would like to shop for beam, quad, LP
>(or combinations thereof) and I wonder how confident I
>can be in the forward gain, f/b and f/s numbers given
>by the manufacturer's ad material.

As a rule of thumb, manufacturers lie about the data of vertical antennas,
whereas for horizontally polarized antennas good data are given.

Best example for the first: rubber duckies, "no-radial" verticals
and "high gain" collinears.

There was an extensive investigation into VHF beams, ahd recent data
claimed were mostly as accurate as reasonably possible. As to HF-beams
and the like, textbooks give a fairly good idea about their capability,
unless it is some super-XYZ-minibeam.

73, Moritz DL5UH




  Do any of you fans of
>antenna modeling software have any experience taking the
>dimensions of commercially available antennas, modeling
>them, and comparing the results to the numbers claimed
>by the manufacturers?
>
>I'll check Deja News for posts you guys may have made on
>the major manufacturers.
>
>Boo hoo, I have to wait an extra year for Dayton because
>Hamvention '97 falls on my wife's graduation day.  :-(
>
>Thanks and 73
>
>--
>.........Monty.
>[e-mail]
>
>




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:17:59 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!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: Do antenna makers lie about their stats?
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 15:44:34 GMT
Organization: Microserve Information Systems (800)-380-INET
Lines: 21
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <540bbf$[e-mail]> <54htcp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dyn18.frazmtn.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/16.227

On Tue, 22 Oct 96 07:34:55 GMT, [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
wrote:

>In article <540bbf$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jim Weir) wrote:
>>. . .
>>Most reputable manufacturers will give you the data that they took on that
>>range and what the reference was -- dbi (db referenced to isotropic) or
>dbd
>>(db referenced to a standard dipole).
>
>> . . .
>
>As I've seen it used, dBd is gain referenced to a dipole in free space,
>not to a "standard dipole".

Roy, what reference are you using when you say dBd is specifically  a
dipole in free space?  I have been under the impression dBd  was a
reference to a dipole at the same height and same ground conditions.
73, Jesse
>



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:01 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news.starnet.net!thepit.trucom.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Marty Albert)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Do antenna makers lie about their stats?
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 15:50:38 GMT
Organization: TruCom Internet Services
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <54o3sj$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <540bbf$[e-mail]> <54hd7t$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup6.trucom.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) wrote:

>In article <540bbf$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jim Weir) wrote:
>>. . .
>>Most reputable manufacturers will give you the data that they took on that
>>range and what the reference was -- dbi (db referenced to isotropic) or
>dbd
>>(db referenced to a standard dipole).

>> . . .

>As I've seen it used, dBd is gain referenced to a dipole in free space,
>not to a "standard dipole". A common misconception is that it does refer
>to a real dipole, rather than the fictitious construct of a dipole in
>free space. It's a useful measure for some antennas, but inappropriate for
>others. For example, it's easy to put a dipole up in the back yard that has
>+4 dBd or more gain. A three-element Yagi, therefore, when mounted over
>real ground, can have a gain of +10 dBd or greater. Just the other day I
>saw some specs from a prominent antenna manufacturer that takes advantage
>of this misunderstanding. Be careful when using dBd!

>Roy Lewallen, W7EL

I think that Roy has hit the nail on the head... It's not so much that
the manufacturers "lie" as that they tend to distort and use poorly
defined terms.

In other words, smoke and mirrors.

I have seen many, many ads where the gain figures are simply given in
"dB". As everyone (should) know, this is meaningless unless you know
what it is referenced to and that is not given in the ads. As Roy
points out, even "dBd" can be distorted.

Take Care & 73



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

Heartland Internet Services

*******************************************
Interested in Amateur Radio?
http://www.trucom.com/ppages/marty
*******************************************



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:03 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!crusty.teleport.com!nntp0.teleport.com!ip-pdx12-24
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Do antenna makers lie about their stats?
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 96 18:02:25 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 81
Message-ID: <54oata$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <540bbf$[e-mail]> <54htcp$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx12-24.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (W6KKT Jesse) wrote:

>Roy, what reference are you using when you say dBd is specifically  a
>dipole in free space?  I have been under the impression dBd  was a
>reference to a dipole at the same height and same ground conditions.
>73, Jesse

That's a very good question. The references I consulted are:

  Jay, Ed., _IEEE Standard Dictionary of Electrical and Electronics Terms_,
            Third Ed.
  Johnson, _Antenna Engineering Handbook_
  Kraus, _Antennas_, 2nd Ed.
  Lawson, W2PV, _Yagi Antenna Design_
  Lo and Lee, _Antenna Handbook_
  Schetgen, KU7G, Ed., _The ARRL Handbook_, 1996 Ed.
  Straw, N6BV, Ed., _The ARRL Antenna Book_, 17th Ed.

Of these references, I was able to find dBd in only one, _The ARRL Antenna
Book_. On page 11-2, it says:

        In its favored directions, a free-space dipole has 2.15 dB gain
        compared to the isotropic radiator. You may see the term dBd in
        amateur literature, meaning gain referenced to a dipole in free
        space. Subtract 2.15 dB from gain in dBi to convert to gain in dBd.

This 2.15 dB conversion factor is used by every writer I've seen. It's the
ratio of the gain of a _free-space_ dipole to an isotropic source, not the
gain of a dipole over ground to an isotropic source. (I see that Force 12
is taking advantage of this. A few days ago I saw a data sheet from them
that showed a two element beam with a "gain" of 9.8 dBd. Another column had
"effective gain" of 4 dBd. Superscripts referred the reader to footnotes
which I didn't read, but I assume they tell you that the first number is
the gain of the beam at some height over ground relative to a dipole in
free space. In my opinion this is useless and misleading information, but
it sure makes for an eye-catching data sheet.)

Brian Beezley's antenna analysis program MN, and I believe AO, routinely
report (or reported -- I haven't used more recent versions) gain in dBd,
for any antenna type or height. The reference is the gain of a free-space
dipole, and no adjustment is made for height of the antenna being modeled.

One of the problems with dBd is that, as far as I can tell, it's a strictly
amateur term with no accepted definition among the professionals. Of all
antenna types, dBd is probably most appropriate to use with Yagis. But even
Lawson in his benchmark Yagi book used only dBi as a reference.

In some cases, like a Yagi, it's useful to know the gain of the antenna
compared to a dipole at the same height. For most Yagis, the free-space
Yagi gain relative to a free-space dipole (i.e., gain in dBd) is close to
the gain you'll see over ground relative to a dipole at the same height
because the elevation patterns are similar and you can rotate the Yagi to
take advantage of its maximum gain. But the free-space relative gains will
be different from the over-ground values if the antennas have significantly
different elevation patterns. And if you have an antenna you can't rotate,
the comparison with a dipole at the same height can be misleading, because
the direction of maximum gain might be different. Although one antenna may
have more "gain" (comparing them in their most favored directions), the
other antenna may radiate more strongly in the desired direction. Another
problem with the real-dipole reference is what to declare an "equivalent
height". What's the "equivalent height" of a sloper, inverted vee,
vertical, or delta loop?

Technically, dBi is no better or worse a reference than dBd. However, it's
universally defined and unambiguous. The only meaningful reference for an
antenna is some other antenna you could physically put up in the same
space, and then, the gain in the desired direction(s) (azimuth _and_
elevation) is what counts. Not the gain relative to a free-space dipole,
real dipole, isotropic, or any other reference. I don't care what the gain
of my phased vertical array is relative to a dipole or isotropic -- I care
about what it is compared to a single vertical element with the same
quality of ground system. For the inverted vee I use to contact my friend
in California, I'm interested only in the gain to the south at a 30 degree
elevation angle, relative to any other antenna I can put on the same single
support and fit in my yard. I calculate the gains of the antenna and
reference in the desired direction(s) in dBi and compare. dBd is just as
good, as long as you don't confuse it with being the gain relative to a
real dipole. Which, as we've seen, does happen.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:04 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news-out.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!feed1.news.erols.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: Merv Stump <[e-mail]@postoffice.worldnet.att.net>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Do antenna makers lie about their stats?
Date: 26 Oct 1996 16:51:18 GMT
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <54tfi6$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <540bbf$[e-mail]>      <54htcp$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.146.34.83
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22ATT (Windows; U; 16bit)

All the modeling software that is on the market today (ELNEC and AO to
name two that I currently use) is a tremendous help in addressing this
question.

I recently designed and built a 40 meter wire yagi.  At 70 feet above
ground the antenna has a gain of 10 dBd.  That looks tremendous, and it is
pretty good, but when you model a dipole at the same height you see that a
dipole at 70 feet has a gain of 5.5 dBd.  My antenna has a gain of 4.5 dB
over a dipole at the same height.  You can further confirm this by
modeling the yagi in free space.  In my case the yagi in free space has a
gain of 4.79 dB over the dipole in free space. (I suspect this was not 4.5
due to rounding errors with the models.)  Obviously in free space the
dipole has NO gain over a dipole in free space.

I don't think antenna manufacturers lie about their antennas.  They just
don't tell us everything.  Or perhaps, we just don't know what questions
to ask.

Regards, Merv



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:05 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!news.abs.net!news.cais.net!news.structured.net!crusty.teleport.com!nntp0.teleport.com!ip-pdx14-18
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Do antenna makers lie about their stats?
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 96 06:43:55 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <54v098$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <540bbf$[e-mail]> <54htcp$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54oata$[e-mail]> <54qpuv$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx14-18.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <54qpuv$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jim Weir) wrote:

>If you had ever done an FCC type acceptance (or part 15 certification) you
>would find, after you waded through vast and half-vast piles of
references,
>that the pattern range reference you need to use is a "standard dipole".
>See, for example, the "bible" for FCC ta&c, the chief engineer of the FCC
>Laurel Labs' good book (Willmar Roberts, "A Guide To FCC Equipment
>Authorizations") on the subject.  If you want to go to the earliest
>reference that I know of, see Silver, MIT Radiation Laboratory Series on
>Microwave Antennas where the standards for "gain" are discussed in some
>detail.
>
>In the pattern range certification, you don't have just a mast.  You have
a
>wooden (or other nonconductive) flagpole and the dipole is raised and
>lowered until the points of maxima and minima are achieved and recorded.
>It matters not WHICH of these points you pick to do the test, just so ALL
>the tests are done at the same point.

>. . .

Thanks for the information. But do they refer to gains relative to the
"standard dipole" as gain in dBd? If so, it would seem that the gain of the
antenna under test, in "dBd", would depend not only on the antenna itself
but also on the height of the reference dipole.

Your description of part 15 sounds a lot different from the one I've got.
All field strengths are specified in microvolts/meter, not dBd or even dBi.
For some tests, measurements are to be made with a dipole, but the
specified field strengths have nothing to do with the dipole's gain. The
commercial reference antennas I've seen and used all come with a
calibration chart which relates the voltage at the antenna terminals to the
field strength in microvolts/meter.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:07 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [e-mail](Anthony Severdia)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Do antenna makers lie about their stats?
Date: 27 Oct 1996 08:08:34 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <54v5a2$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <540bbf$[e-mail]> <54htcp$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54oata$[e-mail]> <54qpuv$[e-mail]> <54v098$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sfo-ca21-02.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun Oct 27  2:08:34 AM CST 1996

In <54v098$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) writes:

    (See response at end)

>
>In article <54qpuv$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jim Weir) wrote:
>
>>If you had ever done an FCC type acceptance (or part 15 certification) you
>>would find, after you waded through vast and half-vast piles of
>references,
>>that the pattern range reference you need to use is a "standard dipole".
>>See, for example, the "bible" for FCC ta&c, the chief engineer of the FCC
>>Laurel Labs' good book (Willmar Roberts, "A Guide To FCC Equipment
>>Authorizations") on the subject.  If you want to go to the earliest
>>reference that I know of, see Silver, MIT Radiation Laboratory Series on
>>Microwave Antennas where the standards for "gain" are discussed in some
>>detail.
>>
>>In the pattern range certification, you don't have just a mast.  You have
>a
>>wooden (or other nonconductive) flagpole and the dipole is raised and
>>lowered until the points of maxima and minima are achieved and recorded.
>>It matters not WHICH of these points you pick to do the test, just so ALL
>>the tests are done at the same point.
>
>>. . .
>
>Thanks for the information. But do they refer to gains relative to the
>"standard dipole" as gain in dBd? If so, it would seem that the gain of the
>antenna under test, in "dBd", would depend not only on the antenna itself
>but also on the height of the reference dipole.
>
>Your description of part 15 sounds a lot different from the one I've got.
>All field strengths are specified in microvolts/meter, not dBd or even dBi.
>For some tests, measurements are to be made with a dipole, but the
>specified field strengths have nothing to do with the dipole's gain. The
>commercial reference antennas I've seen and used all come with a
>calibration chart which relates the voltage at the antenna terminals to the
>field strength in microvolts/meter.
>
>Roy Lewallen, W7EL
>

    Roy, this is a clear case of "apples" and "oranges".  Your comments
obviously refer to standard broadcast band field strength measurements
whereas Jim was referring to VHF and UHF+ broadcast and ancillary
services.

    Sorry,  -=Tony=-    W6ANV   San Francisco, CA



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:08 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!newspump.sol.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!shore!mv!wd1v.mv.com!user
From: [e-mail] (John D. Seney, WD1V,   LeCroy T&M   800.553.2769)
Subject: Re: Do antenna makers lie about their stats?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: MV Communications, Inc.
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 10:25:53 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <540bbf$[e-mail]>      <54htcp$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54tfi6$[e-mail]>
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: wd1v.mv.com
Lines: 27

In article <54tfi6$[e-mail]>, Merv Stump
<[e-mail]@postoffice.worldnet.att.net> wrote:

> All the modeling software that is on the market today (ELNEC and AO to
> name two that I currently use) is a tremendous help in addressing this
> question.
>

There is a second order problem in that most hams then use their
antennas with radios were variations in the RADIO's performance
are unknown and CAN'T be checked easily against manufacturer's
specifications.

On the air tests, listening, QST reviews, opinions of our
friends, blind faith, and "bells and whistles" are a poor substitute to
metrics.

The manufacturers of our radios owe us testing at the dealer's
showrooms where we can verify our toys are really hitting the
numbers, before, during, and after the "sale".

As Ronald Reagan used to chant, "Trust, but verify!".

73,

John D. Seney
http://www.mv.com/ipusers/wd1v


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:08 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news2.new-york.net!not-for-mail
From: "Niels L. Hoyvald" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Duplexer?
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155
X-Nntp-Posting-User: (Unauthenticated)
Organization: NLH & SONS Inc.
Message-ID: <01bbc2a7$28b506e0$67a38dcc@hoyvald>
X-Trace: 846270201/17944
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: wppp03.blast.net
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 19:03:23 GMT
Lines: 9

Is there anyway to build(plans ect.) or to purchase a duplexer that can
split a single output from the transceiver into two antennas at specific
frequencies. 1. covering Ham Bands 144-148mhz  and  2. Emergency/Fire
152-172mhz. (VSWR is a little high on the Ham Bands 2.6:1, but is perfect
on the emergency freqs.)
P.S. I have a commercial rig capable of TX/RX on Ham Bands and I use it for
the fire/emergency service.




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:09 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-feed2.bbnplanet.com!dilbert.whoi.edu!whgb3.mbl.edu!user
From: [e-mail] (Betchy)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Eggbeaters for Sat.
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 08:52:24 -0500
Organization: Marine Biological Laboratory
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: WHGB3.MBL.EDU

I'm wondering just how effective the M2 eggbeaters are for Sat. work? I'm
limited currently on antenna installations and after 8 yrs of being away
am interested in getting back into the birds, any input or recommendations
would be appreciated. I cannot install rotors.

tnx, KA1BOY  [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:10 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!cu-dialup-1828.cit.cornell.edu!user
From: [e-mail] (Joel Govostes)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Feeding a dipole for multi-bands?
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 11:20:05 -0500
Organization: Cornell University
Lines: 25
Sender: [e-mail] (Verified)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cu-dialup-1828.cit.cornell.edu

I have read that the end fed wire antenna (1/2 wave or longwire) can be
used on multiple bands, if fed with ladder line thru an antenna coupler.
However, it is always stressed that this antenna must be worked against a
GOOD ground.  That is, the "better" the ground system, the better the
performance and fewer RF problems.

But... what counts as an "adequate" ground for this type of antenna, or a
ground mounted vertical antenna for that matter?  I think the Handbook
suggests a number of 8 foot pipes driven into the ground.  Still, how much
is "good enough?"

Since I don't have access to an adequate ground system, I came up with
this idea: Instead of trying to ground the coupler, or providing a
counterpoise wire for each band, I would like to try center feeding an
80-m dipole thusly:  Instead of using ladder line, I would connect a
variable L/C circuit at the feedpoint, and run coax from there to
transmitter.  Will this work correctly?

I.E., Will a variable capacitor / roller (variable) inductor "coupler" at
the center point of the half wave antenna transfer the power correctly?

Of course to change bands I would go out to my upstairs porch, near the
feed-point, and change the C/L settings appropriately.  Thanks for any
info...
JWG


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:14 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Feeding a dipole for multi-bands?
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 19:22:09 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 58
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 102.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

altavoz wrote:
>
> Joel Govostes wrote:
> >
> > I have read that the end fed wire antenna (

***TYPO***  .45w s/b    ***.25w***    below.
>
> altavoz: 320 feet tall ( .6 w , 80 meter) You'll have to make it a .45w
> antenna . You absolutely have to use a CAP hat at 80 meters !
> The pattern is too high , the cap hat brings it down a bit and
> elevated feedpoint brings it down some more.
>    VHF ants are easier to learn on. You dont need radials of many
> lengths unless its a .5w ant' . The ***.25w*** ant( 1/4w) has a current
> peak at the feedpoint, thats why you can get away with ANYTHING
> as a radial. Its a low "Q" ant . but a 1/2w (my 1/2w are always .6w )
> ant needs an exact length radial cause of the HI Q . Its current peak
> is .35w away from the feedpoint on both the element and the ground wire.
>     Isnt it great that you can find all this in ARRL ? NOT !!!
> We tune antennas with an "L" network and get rid of the CAP with
> some number crunching on the calculater . CAPS are expensive and to
> be avoided. A pi tuner will tune a wider range ( My ICOM auto is a pi)
>  Now lets get rid of the cap ( Xc).
>   A .6w ant is 200-J100 ( close enuf) . Putting the 200 ohms across
> either element of a series tuned circuit transforms this to a lower
> resistance (50ohm coax) cause the cap or coil are very HI Z ( they have
> very hig voltages/low currents across them . The reverse , putting a very lo
w
> resistance antenna (20ohm) in series with either element of a tank
> circuit transforms it to a hi Z (50ohm coax) cause a tank has high
> circulating currents ( LOW Z).
>  The trick is to make the CAP part of the antenna evaporate . Put
> the 200-J100 in series with an XL and use the antennas Xc as the
> other element of the series tuned circuit . 3 things : 200 ohm R
> parallel to its own 100 Xc all in series to the COIL .
>
> > I.E., Will a variable capacitor / roller (variable) inductor "coupler" at
> > the center point of the half wave antenna transfer the power correctly?
>
> altavoz: Yes.
>
> > Of course to change bands I would go out to my upstairs porch, near the
> > feed-point, and change the C/L settings appropriately.  Thanks for any
> > info...
> > JWG
>
> altavoz: Ohh... you live on the 12 floor ?
> Isnt strange how "religious" people are about antennas ?
> a ***.25w*** , 80 meter ant needs a cap hat but few use it cause
> nobody talks about it ! And few use elevated feedpoints and
> they're essential to get the current peak at the feedpoint to
> make a lower angle lobe . Even if you can only elevate by ***.1w***
> you're still going to get far better DX .
>
> ______End of text  from altavoz___________

--

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:16 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Feeding a dipole for multi-bands?
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 18:52:43 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 69
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 102.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Joel Govostes wrote:
>
> I have read that the end fed wire antenna (1/2 wave or longwire) can be
> used on multiple bands, if fed with ladder line thru an antenna coupler.
> However, it is always stressed that this antenna must be worked against a
> GOOD ground.  That is, the "better" the ground system, the better the
> performance and fewer RF problems.
>
> But... what counts as an "adequate" ground for this type of antenna, or a
> ground mounted vertical antenna for that matter?  I think the Handbook
> suggests a number of 8 foot pipes driven into the ground.  Still, how much
> is "good enough?"
>
> Since I don't have access to an adequate ground system, I came up with
> this idea: Instead of trying to ground the coupler, or providing a
> counterpoise wire for each band, I would like to try center feeding an
> 80-m dipole thusly:  Instead of using ladder line, I would connect a
> variable L/C circuit at the feedpoint, and run coax from there to
> transmitter.  Will this work correctly?

altavoz: 320 feet tall ( .6 w , 80 meter) You'll have to make it a .45w
antenna . You absolutely have to use a CAP hat at 80 meters !
The pattern is too high , the cap hat brings it down a bit and
elevated feedpoint brings it down some more.
   VHF ants are easier to learn on. You dont need radials of many
lengths unless its a .5w ant' . The 45w ant( 1/4w) has a current
peak at the feedpoint, thats why you can get away with ANYTHING
as a radial. Its a low "Q" ant . but a 1/2w (my 1/2w are always .6w )
ant needs an exact length radial cause of the HI Q . Its current peak
is .35w away from the feedpoint on both the element and the ground wire.
    Isnt it great that you can find all this in ARRL ? NOT !!!
We tune antennas with an "L" network and get rid of the CAP with
some number crunching on the calculater . CAPS are expensive and to
be avoided. A pi tuner will tune a wider range ( My ICOM auto is a pi)
 Now lets get rid of the cap ( Xc).
  A .6w ant is 200-J100 ( close enuf) . Putting the 200 ohms across
either element of a series tuned circuit transforms this to a lower
resistance (50ohm coax) cause the cap or coil are very HI Z ( they have
very hig voltages/low currents across them . The reverse , putting a very low
resistance antenna (20ohm) in series with either element of a tank
circuit transforms it to a hi Z (50ohm coax) cause a tank has high
circulating currents ( LOW Z).
 The trick is to make the CAP part of the antenna evaporate . Put
the 200-J100 in series with an XL and use the antennas Xc as the
other element of the series tuned circuit . 3 things : 200 ohm R
parallel to its own 100 Xc all in series to the COIL .


> I.E., Will a variable capacitor / roller (variable) inductor "coupler" at
> the center point of the half wave antenna transfer the power correctly?

altavoz: Yes.

> Of course to change bands I would go out to my upstairs porch, near the
> feed-point, and change the C/L settings appropriately.  Thanks for any
> info...
> JWG

altavoz: Ohh... you live on the 12 floor ?
Isnt strange how "religious" people are about antennas ?
a .45w , 80 meter ant needs a cap hat but few use it cause
nobody talks about it ! And few use elevated feedpoints and
they're essential to get the current peak at the feedpoint to
make a lower angle lobe . Even if you can only elevate by .2w
you're still going to get far better DX .



______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:17 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.bc.net!unixg.ubc.ca!aurora.cs.athabascau.ca!news.mag-net.com!freenet.unbc.edu!news.scn.org!scn.org!bb840
From: [e-mail] (James Aeschliman)
Subject: Re: Feeding a Wideband Wire Loop
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail] (James Aeschliman)
Organization: Seattle Community Network
References: <[e-mail]> <54dmn6$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 18:28:46 GMT
Lines: 37


In a previous article, [e-mail] (John Seboldt) says:

>
>In article <54dmn6$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Mark Schoonover
><KA6WKE>) wrote:
>
>>         I'm planning on building a wideband HF wire loop. I can
>> support a 200' loop, but not sure how to feed it. I know how
>> to feed it for single band use, but I would like to use it
>> for 3-30 mhz. Should I use ladder line and a tuner? If
>> ladder line, then should it be a specific length? Essentially
>> newbie questions I'm sure.
>
>Yep, ladder line and a tuner indeed -- my system exactly.  My loop is
>about 350 feet, but yours should work fine -- pretty close to full wave on
>80 meters, though on the lower bands you should always be open to trying
>the system as kind of a top-loaded vertical or end-loaded random wire --
>that is, tie the feeders together and feed it unbalanced against ground
>(this is the only way my 350 foot loop works on 160 meters).
>
>Length of ladder line?  The cheap and dirty way:  just don't worry about
>length of line.  However, you may get a hard to match impedance on some
>bands.  If so, just snip a few feet off the feedline and try again until
>your tuner seems happy with all the bands you use.
>
>John Seboldt K0JD
>[e-mail]
>
According to my 1995 ARRL Handbook, you can also feed it with 50 ohm
coax, and it will probably work 3-30 MHz without a tuner.  And as noted
above can also be used as a top loaded vertical for 160 M.  Look in the
Handbook in the Antenna Projects chapter where it talks about using full
wave loops for more information.
--
Jim Aeschliman                      [e-mail]
Black Diamond, Washington           KD7MK


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:18 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!news.mr.net!bell.pconline.com!tsb-p15.pconline.com!user
From: [e-mail] (John Seboldt)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Feeding a Wideband Wire Loop
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 22:33:54 -0600
Organization: MidiPfeifenMusikFunkWerk, GmbH
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54dmn6$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tsb-p15.pconline.com
X-Newsreader: NewsWatcher 2.0
X-Stupid-Question: Why are you reading these header lines?

In article <54dmn6$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Mark Schoonover
<KA6WKE>) wrote:

>         I'm planning on building a wideband HF wire loop. I can
> support a 200' loop, but not sure how to feed it. I know how
> to feed it for single band use, but I would like to use it
> for 3-30 mhz. Should I use ladder line and a tuner? If
> ladder line, then should it be a specific length? Essentially
> newbie questions I'm sure.

Yep, ladder line and a tuner indeed -- my system exactly.  My loop is
about 350 feet, but yours should work fine -- pretty close to full wave on
80 meters, though on the lower bands you should always be open to trying
the system as kind of a top-loaded vertical or end-loaded random wire --
that is, tie the feeders together and feed it unbalanced against ground
(this is the only way my 350 foot loop works on 160 meters).

Length of ladder line?  The cheap and dirty way:  just don't worry about
length of line.  However, you may get a hard to match impedance on some
bands.  If so, just snip a few feet off the feedline and try again until
your tuner seems happy with all the bands you use.

John Seboldt K0JD
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:19 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!news.mr.net!bell.pconline.com!tsa-p15.pconline.com!user
From: [e-mail] (John Seboldt)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Feeding a Wideband Wire Loop
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 12:11:31 -0600
Organization: MidiPfeifenMusikFunkWerk, GmbH
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <54dmn6$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <01bbc160$13460e00$785292cf@default>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tsa-p15.pconline.com
X-Newsreader: NewsWatcher 2.0
X-Stupid-Question: Why are you reading these header lines?

In article <01bbc160$13460e00$785292cf@default>, "DAVE ABSHIRE"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> I don't know if I did it right but I put up a 80 meter loop and at the feed
> point I used a 4:1 balun and don't use a tuner. OH let me rephrase that my
> friend don't use a tuner. And we found that it worked OK not great on
> 10-80. But I think if we could get it higher than 40 foot it would work
> better, But as I said this was the first time I ever worked with a loop....
>                                         Dave

Assuming you're using coax up to that balun... the coax is the culprit.
You won't have a matched load for any band, I'll bet :-), so the loss of
the coax when not operating at its characteristic impedance will be
relatively high.  I'm surprised you get any kind of match at all without a
tuner, but the rig must be able to do it, so you got out.

Open line and a tuner is the only really efficient way to do multiband
with most  trapless wire designs.

John K0JD


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:20 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.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: Feeding a Wideband Wire Loop
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 18:43:51 -0400
Organization: OneNet Communications HUB News Server
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <54dmn6$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <01bbc160$13460e00$785292cf@default>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port-2-27.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)

DAVE ABSHIRE wrote:
>
> I don't know if I did it right but I put up a 80 meter loop and at the feed
> point I used a 4:1 balun and don't use a tuner. OH let me rephrase that my
> friend don't use a tuner. And we found that it worked OK not great on
> 10-80. But I think if we could get it higher than 40 foot it would work
> better, But as I said this was the first time I ever worked with a loop....
>                                         Dave

I haven't done an 80-m loop, but I've done a 20.

The feed impedance of a full-wave loop is about 100 to 110 ohms.  Using a
4:1 balun is probably not the best thing to do.

I used a 1/4-wave section of RG-11 (electrical length) to transform the feed
to about 50 ohms.  The 20-m loop worked fine on 20 and on 10.

I believe the 80-m loop should work fine on all the harmonics of 80 if you
feed it this way.  You don't need a 4:1 balun of open-wire, balanced feeds.
Of course, a transmatch (the right name for an antenna tuner) won't hurt.


Rich Griffiths    W2RG


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:21 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!pinetree
From: [e-mail] (WB3U)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Feeding a Wideband Wire Loop
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 96 03:59:58 GMT
Organization: Not Enough
Lines: 12
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <54s2jt$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <54dmn6$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <01bbc160$13460e00$785292cf@default> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pinetree.microserve.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

   [e-mail] (John Seboldt) wrote:

>Open line and a tuner is the only really efficient way to do
>multiband with most  trapless wire designs.

If the tuner uses a balun, results are likely to be mediocre
on at least some of the desired bands.  What's needed for this
application is a true balanced tuner, not a single ended tuner
driving a balun.

73,
Jack  WB3U


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:22 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Feeding a Wideband Wire Loop
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 96 15:04:29 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <54dmn6$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <01bbc160$13460e00$785292cf@default> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1d.delphi.com
X-To: Rich Griffiths <[e-mail]>

Rich Griffiths <[e-mail]> writes:

>The feed impedance of a full-wave loop is about 100 to 110 ohms.  Using a

That's for a square. If one turns the loop into a rectangle,
and feeds it on a short side, the impedance can be be
adjusted to a perfect 50 ohms. Don't know what that does
to a horizontal loop radiation pattern.

73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:23 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!news.mr.net!bell.pconline.com!tsa-p19.pconline.com!user
From: [e-mail] (John Seboldt)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Feeding a Wideband Wire Loop
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 23:21:07 -0600
Organization: MidiPfeifenMusikFunkWerk, GmbH
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <54dmn6$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <01bbc160$13460e00$785292cf@default> <[e-mail]> <01bbc21a$7067a700$1b4692cf@default>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tsa-p19.pconline.com
X-Newsreader: NewsWatcher 2.0
X-Stupid-Question: Why are you reading these header lines?

In article <01bbc21a$7067a700$1b4692cf@default>, "DAVE ABSHIRE"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> John Seboldt <[e-mail]> wrote in article
> <[e-mail]>...
> > Open line and a tuner is the only really efficient way to do multiband
> > with most  trapless wire designs.
> >
> > John K0JD
> >
>
> I am feeding it with RG-8 and a 4:1 balun because if I use the 450 line
> I get into the radio and TV with just 50 watts. Even though I have every-
> thing grounded. So I burred about 140 ft of RG-8 and it stopped. I use it

[snip]
>                                 Dave
>
>

A true balanced tuner feeding your 450 ohm line would likely eliminate
this problem.  Tuners that put a toroid balun on the output of an
unbalanced tuner do not qualify as balanced tuners when confronted with
the random loads of an unmatched line.  A little more work to do, but well
worth it.

John K0JD


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:24 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Feeding a Wideband Wire Loop
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 09:39:23 -0800
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <54dmn6$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <01bbc160$13460e00$785292cf@default> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.102.182
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

Rich Griffiths wrote:
> Conversely, if you squish the square enough and feed it on the long side,
> you have a folded dipole.

Hi Rich, guess I should add, if you squish it and feed it on the short
side you eventually have a one-wavelength piece of shorted transmission
line, i.e. zero ohms. So depending on the form factor of the rectangle,
we should be able to get any resonant purely resistive value between
zero ohms and 300 ohms. I'll run the radiation pattern for a horizontal
rectangular loop to see if it's different from a square.

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


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:25 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!usc!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz.cv.hp.com!news
From: Marty Gulseth <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Feeding a Wideband Wire Loop
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 13:46:26 -0800
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Spokane Division
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <54dmn6$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <01bbc160$13460e00$785292cf@default> <[e-mail]> <54s2jt$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpspkwt.spk.hp.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)
To: WB3U <[e-mail]>

WB3U wrote:

> >Open line and a tuner is the only really efficient way to do
> >multiband with most  trapless wire designs.
>
> If the tuner uses a balun, results are likely to be mediocre
> on at least some of the desired bands.  What's needed for this
> application is a true balanced tuner, not a single ended tuner
> driving a balun.

Hi Jack,

For my edification, could you please elaborate on why a "true
balanced tuner" is required? Can you quantify, even roughly, how
much better the true balanced tuner will be than the "balun" versions?

Thanks!

Marty - W7LEJ


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:25 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news2.interlog.com!rose.com!news
From: [e-mail] (T. Mooney)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Fibreglass antenna's
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 02:03:30 GMT
Organization: Rose Media Incorporated, Canada
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <54jtsg$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: s017.rose.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

I have a 4 1/2 foor fibreglass antenna.. How do I tune it? buy
tighting the antenna holder? what!!!! I have a 3 to 1 match right
now.. and I want to get it down to atleast 1.7 or LOWER!



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:26 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!szdc!news
From: [e-mail] (Alex Evonosky)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Force 12 info needed
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 23:54:59 GMT
Organization: Zippo
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.1/32.230

Bill Levey <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Hello
>
>Any contact information for Force 12 Antenna systems would be greatly
>appreciated! Thanks in advance // 73,
>
>Bill Levey - WA4FAT for UA6XGL

[e-mail] is their Email Address.
they respond quite quickly!
73, de kb4lbx



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:27 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!info.htcomp.net!NewsWatcher!user
From: [e-mail] (W T Shaw)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Found hardline.  Is it 50 or 72 ohm?
Date: 25 Oct 1996 15:11:06 GMT
Organization: Another Netscape News Server User
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <wtshaw-2510961021560001@207.17.188.152>
References: <01bbc26d$476d7480$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.17.188.152

In article <01bbc26d$476d7480$[e-mail]>, "Ron Ammundsen"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Three coils of 7/8" rigid hardline coax washed up on our island.  The
> shortest section is about 60', the longest is maybe 180'.  The water damage
> seems to extend in only about 12" on each end.
>
> Is there an easy way to tell whether this is 50 ohm or 72 ohm hardline?
>

Put a 50 ohm.  Use low power, or SWR bridge at other end.  If it is 50
ohm, you should get a flat 1:1 at all frequencies.  If you do not, but get
a higher value that may varies may with frequency, depending on your
choice of equipment, it isn't 50 ohms.  This is a good means of testing
any unknown line for a Z of 50 ohms.
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
[e-mail]   Mac Crypto Programs
       You might even try to use ROT45.
    O*;B 7B LBH 'EHFGlOZZwB;AAL p4EFBA
           http://www.htcomp.net/wts/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:28 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-stkh.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!eru.mt.luth.se!news.kth.se!tybalt.admin.kth.se!celsiustech.se!seunet!news2.swip.net!mn6.swip.net!mn5.swip.net!news
From: Maude Schyffert <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Found hardline.  Is it 50 or 72 ohm?
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 15:44:31 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbc26d$476d7480$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup106-3-1.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 3.0Gold (Win16; I)
To: Ron Ammundsen <[e-mail]>

Ron Ammundsen wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Three coils of 7/8" rigid hardline coax washed up on our island.  The
> shortest section is about 60', the longest is maybe 180'.  The water damage
> seems to extend in only about 12" on each end.
>
> Is there an easy way to tell whether this is 50 ohm or 72 ohm hardline?
>
Well impedance is depending on the ratio between inner conductor
diameter and the diameter of the shield, I do not remember the formula
but you can always check with an known cabel.

SM0BKZ


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:29 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!in-news.erinet.com!bug.rahul.net!rahul.net!a2i!hustle.rahul.net!rahul.net!a2i!satlink!un3.satlink.com!speed!banana!banana!anibal
From: [e-mail] (anibal aguirre)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: fractal antenna. what is this??
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 96 14:34:20 EST
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Lines: 11
X-Newsreader: Alamito Mail and News Manager (V2.0.4 for Waffle) (unregistered)

hi friends: I'm sorry by my ingnorance but, what is a fractal antenna??
Can anybody tell me some about this in easy-words???
tx's a lot.
anibal
LU4DVJ
--
---
E-mail: [e-mail]
Buenos Aires - Argentina




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:30 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-9.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: 21 Oct 1996 12:52:28 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 56
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54g9oc$[e-mail]>
References: <54fsjg$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Chip,
In article <54fsjg$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Fractenna) writes:

>So, for example, for the tenth time, let's deal with radiation
resistance.
>As I have said publically many times, you are right: the accepted
>definiton is to measure the RESISTANCE AT THE CURRENT ANTINODE

No, that's not correct.

Radiation resistance is different than feedpoint resistance or impedance,
they have nothing to do with each other except in the case of a lossless
radiator.

Let me give a specific example. A folded dipole.

The radiation resistance of a folded dipole is exactly the same as a
conventional dipole of the same physical dimensions. You can find this
explained in detail in the Antenna Fundamentals section of Jordan and
Balmain's Electromagnetic Waves and Radiating Systems, 2nd edition, page
403.

Terminal (or feedpoint) resistance includes the transformation of
impedances by the feed system as well as system loss, so it is meaningless
in determining efficiency.

The reason given for a Fractal offering potentially higher efficiency than
a  conventional circular small loop of the same dimensions was the
increase in "radiation resistance", yet the actual data was only the
feedpoint resistance, a value that includes system losses and impedance
transformation in the structure. It was not the radiation resistance at
all.

>So what?
>Why are you implying to everyone that I have DELIBERATELY twisted the
>definition (at the time)  to make a case for fractal antennas?

I'm not implying anything, it was plainly stated on pages 58 and 59 of
Summer 1996 Communications Quarterly the efficiency improved because the
radiation resistance increased, one exact quote is "There are clear
advantages in radiation resuistance and efficiency for the fractal loops,
which are compromised with loads of very low Q factors." That conclusion
is meaningless, since efficiency or radiation resistance was never
actually determined.

>Now, performance. A fractal loop performs better than a  physically small
>Euclidean loop. It has a HIGHER RADIATION resistance. That's a fact. It
>has a HIGHER FIELD STRENGTH--with ohmic losses included. That's a fact.

How did you determine those facts? Did you build an antenna and measure
it? can you describe the antenna and the test method?

Please give more details, now you have my attention!

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:31 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas
Date: 21 Oct 1996 08:42:38 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 93
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54fr3u$[e-mail]>
References: <54eua8$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <54esor$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Fractenna) writes:


>Sorry Tom; won't stoop to your ignorance.
>73 Chip

Nice reply Chip. A reply like that plainly indicates maturity and
thoughtful consideration.

In article <54eua8$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Fractenna) writes:

>Let's see...do I follow your logic...This guy 'Cohen' publishes in
>non-peer review so he can pull the wool over everyone's eyes. Or he's
>basically an idiot, a zeolot who's the only one in his so-called field of
>fractal antennas. Is that basically your premise? Do I catch your drift?

Everyone makes mistakes from time to time. Answering "hard technical
questions" honestly without attempts at intimidation or immature name
calling is what kept science growing away from bat wing and eye-of-newt
voo doo.

It seems to me the most inaccurate theories are often defended by verbal
barrages of name calling, personal comments, "assigning busy work" to keep
anyone that questions the basic issues,  and attempts at intimidation..
doing ANYTHING to avoid having to give technical answers. I suspect that's
usually because there are no technical answers.

For example the author might attempt that with comments like:

>article which has a CHAOTIC FRACTAL ANTENNA in it! How 'bout that! And
its
>an OPTIMIZED antenna!  How can this --possibly--be??

>antenna.And another this year on fractal antennae. Strange stuff! Has the
>'Transactions' lost itself? Tsk Tsk.

>blackbody radiation from surfaces as being a fractal phenomenon. Those
>pesky, 'faddy' fractals!

>Lightning! Why doesn't  THAT travel in a straight line??

>'Cohen' even talked about this in his first article, but we can't pay
>attention to him, can we? Gee, here's some guys in Spain who (HAHAHA)

>chamber and modelled it with a Connection Machine! HAHA! What a laugh
>riot! The giggle-fest is in January IEE Electronics Letters.

>There's OH, so much more, but after all, we MUST pursue the straight and
>narrow world that we love so much-- and hey, why NOT discount fractals?

>a while. And Tom, you have some reading to do.

Another response is to attack, and then make one's self unavailable for
reply:

>P.S. I can be reached at [e-mail]. Won't be on the newsgroup for
>a while. And Tom, you have some reading to do.

Of course, the technical questions still remain even after attempts at
deflecting them with nasty remarks or intimidation fail.

Such as:

Why does a geometric name have something to do with antenna efficiency?
This is especially puzzling since a linear conductor produces the highest
efficiency in a small radiator, and any larger array is simply treated an
array of point sources with certain spacial-ohase-level relationships.

For example, I can't say a circle, square, rectangle, polygon, has all
kinds of wonderful chariteristics because the dimensions, phase, and
current relationships between various parts of the antenna determine
whether it's a good radiator or not. Why is a Fractal an exception to this
rule?

Or the specific question about small loops. The most efficient small loop
uses a thick (low resistance), smooth conductor with uniform current over
the entire structure with purely capacitive loading concentrated at the
open ends (actually this is true for a sall dipole or monopole as well).
The circle shape maximizes radiation resistance.
Even though the Fractal behaves exactly the opposite of everything else
known by science, is it alleged to be better. What mecanisim causes this?

Radiation resistance is not the resistance measured at the feedpoint of an
antenna, that's a plain fact. Why is feedpoint resistance wrongly called
radiation resistance in Fractal articles and given as the reason
efficiency improves in small loops, when feedpoint resistance has nothing
to do with efficiency?

Valid technical questions like these are avoided or deflected.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:32 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!feed1.news.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] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas
Date: 21 Oct 1996 09:08:00 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 37
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54fsjg$[e-mail]>
References: <54fr3u$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hi Tom--

You have , once again, failed to present any technical issues not already
addressed. And using the newsgroup to imply they haven't been.

So, for example, for the tenth time, let's deal with radiation resistance.
As I have said publically many times, you are right: the accepted
definiton is to measure the RESISTANCE AT THE CURRENT ANTINODE

AT THE CURRENT ANTINODE

AT THE CURRENT ANTINODE.

So what?

Why are you implying to everyone that I have DELIBERATELY twisted the
definition (at the time)  to make a case for fractal antennas?

WHATS YOUR MOTIVE??

As for maturity, I would still like to publish the letter you sent me.

Now, performance. A fractal loop performs better than a  physically small
Euclidean loop. It has a HIGHER RADIATION resistance. That's a fact. It
has a HIGHER FIELD STRENGTH--with ohmic losses included. That's a fact.

If you are a scientist, go and BUILD one Tom, and CHECK it out!  And
publish in PEER review showing I'm all wet. Go fer it buddy! I am READY.



73

Chip N1IR

P.S> Say, how do charges accelerate again? Only on straight lines? With
changing speeds?


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:33 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!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: 21 Oct 1996 09:23:03 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 19
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54ftfn$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Say Tom--Here's a chance to have some fractal fun.

Why don't you dig out the March Microwave Journal (Linden and
Altschuler)and find the 7-wire chaotic fractal. This antenna is optimized
for gain, bandwidth, and so on. Then tell us why its such a bad antenna. I
think lots of people would find this useful since :1) It gets me out of
the loop, so I don't enter the equation; personalities are  not involved;
2) it lets you comment on a peer-reviewed article.
3) It gives everyone a better read on where you're coming from.

Don't it seem odd that the charges have to make so many turns to provide
the optimization?

Can you build an antenna with the SAME characteristics from a straight
line? Tell us how to do it. Why hasn't it been done?

73

Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:34 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.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: Fractal Antennas
Date: 22 Oct 1996 08:55:39 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 24
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54ig8b$[e-mail]>
References: <54gf12$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Gee, just got another confirmation on the MEASUREMENTS vs SIMULATIONS of a
fractal loop. Yet another satisfied customer (with an anechoic chamber).

But DARN TOM!  I CAN'T g i v e you those results because the 'Net
isn't--PEER REVIEWED!!

And Tom, you told everyone that re:fractal antennas--'I checked this out'.
Assuming someone made you antenna god, what is it exactly you checked out?
Have you BUILT and tested one? HAVE YOU MODELLED one? If you don't like
NEC (2 or 4), have you tried FEM or FDTD methods? If you don't like my
stuff, why haven't you checked out other fractal antennae articles? Why do
I get the impression that you haven't done a darn thing with even a simple
fractal antenna and are trying to get everyone else to do it? (and then
make some fractious argument about accelerating charges needing straight
lines). Shouldn't we take your lead through example?

You are an extremely careful experimentalist--why don't we see that
shining through here?? Why is your obvious knowledge of antennas limited
to ones designed before 1960??

73

Chip N1IR



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:35 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!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: 21 Oct 1996 14:18:59 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 21
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54geqj$[e-mail]>
References: <54g9oc$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

You know how I determined 'these facts'. Why repeat it?

Go try it yourself; you are an excellent experimentalist.

By the way,  there will be no more new fractal antenna research in
Comm.Quart. and most of it will be in peer reviewed journals, some in
press...unavailable to the average ham. I enjoy Comm.Quarterly very much
but have got considerable flack for publishing the stuff there almost
exclusively.

I agree; it was a mistake to bring in  something new through a strictly
ham audience. Better to let it filter down over a couple of decades.

Finally a confession: its all--a JOKE! ALL THE FRACTAL STUFF IS
IMAGINATION! IT WAS A GRAND HOAX TO THROUGH TOM OFF! FRACTALS DON"T
--really--exist! So how could there be fractal antennas?! And I'm a space
alien from Zubenelgenubee!

I'll be blasting you!

Chip


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:36 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!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: 21 Oct 1996 14:22:26 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 11
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54gf12$[e-mail]>
References: <54g9pj$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hey--what am I--- a library?!

You were the one who stressed peer review. Go ask for it from your library
on interlibrary loan. In other words, DO SOME WORK! Or don't you keep up
on new antenna developments Tom?

I'm sure someone here will be willing to send it to you.

Cheers

Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:37 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.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] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas
Date: 22 Oct 1996 17:15:53 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 19
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54jdi9$[e-mail]>
References: <54geqj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <54geqj$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Fractenna) writes:
>--really--exist! So how could there be fractal antennas?! And I'm a space
>alien from Zubenelgenubee!
>I'll be blasting you!

In article <54gf12$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Fractenna) writes:
>Hey--what am I--- a library?!

Hmmmm. First you claim to be a Zubenelgenubeen (or is it bean), now you
want to know if you are a library.

You can be what ever you like, that's the beauty of life on the third
stone from the Sun. Go in peace Librarian (with a flash of the Vulcan
greeting Spock always used on Star Trek).
:-)

73, Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:38 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!news.PBI.net!news.pacbell.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Habib Delgado)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 17:31:59 GMT
Organization: .
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54ig8b$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-206-170-2-10.sntc01.pacbell.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.299
X-No-Archive: yes

Will you two take it outside and quit wasting our bandwidth----
Fractenna, you were the one who opened up by saying you wanted to
avoid a flame war.
Tom, well, just shut the fuck up.


-----LET EACH MAN BE PAID IN FULL-----
Habib Delgado


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:38 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.erols.net!EU.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Fractal Antennas
Date: 26 Oct 1996 03:06:24 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 11
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54sd9g$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Habib
Delgado) writes:

>Tom, well, just shut the %^#& up.

OK, I will but that remark was totally inappropriate. Given the title of
this thread, a less twisted remark would have been enough. Sorry for
bending your ear too much Habib.
I promise to straighten out.

Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:39 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!bcm.tmc.edu!newshost.convex.com!cnn.exu.ericsson.se!news
From: [e-mail] (Todd Nichols)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: FS:  Books
Date: 29 Oct 1996 18:06:04 GMT
Organization: Ericsson North America Inc.
Lines: 19
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <555h2c$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: sunmgc1.rtp.ericsson.se

The following books are for sale.  Prices do not include shipping, but if you
buy
more than two, I will pay shipping.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Todd Nichols KB0HQU           Ericsson Inc.                  [phone]
[e-mail]                          Research Triangle Park, NC
"Ensign, set a new course.  There's coffee in that nebula!" - Capt. Janeway




Modern Antenna Design - by Milligan - 1985 - $10

Microwave Handbook vol. 1:  Components and Operating Techniques - ed by Dixon
-
        1991 - $8

Microwave Engineering and Applications - by Gandhi - 1981 - $10




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:40 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!news1.iamerica.net!news
From: [e-mail] (dwh)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: FS: 1/2 INCH HARDLINE CONNECTORS
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 19:46:00 GMT
Organization: LDS I-America
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <54rm34$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.173.249.21
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.swap:92420 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30431 rec.radio.amateur.misc:116993

For Sale,
  1/2 Inch Hardline Connectors, new in the package.  Type N connector.
Comes with silicon sealant, gaskets, connector, and instruction sheet.
Can be used on any 1/2 inch hardline to include Andrew.  Will also
come with a sheet of DB Products Vapor Seal Sealant.  Price is $25
each and I have two left.

Email [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:41 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!holonet!colossus.holonet.net!cencore!forrest.gehrke
From: [e-mail] (FORREST GEHRKE)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Fwd: Tower Safety
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 96 21:11:00 -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: 25

BB> In light of the recent Texas tragedy, where a 1500-foot commercial
BB> transmission tower collapsed with the loss of three lives, perhaps t
BB> subject should be reviewed by tower climbers.  Few details made the

About 20 years ago Life Magazine published a compendium of
its more famous pictures.  One of them was of a 1500 ft.
tower on its way down with three fellows clinging to
the side of it at about 1000 ft.  The camera caught the
scene when the tower was at 45 degrees.

It was an awful scene and one could only look at that picture
with horror.

With no recourse for those workers when an accident occurs
at such heights, shouldn't they be carrying those parachute
backpacks you see stunt artists use for directed landings?

I have no stomach for climbing a tower.  I have a 90 ft.
tower and I've climbed it to 50 feet.  When the breeze
starts moving the trees around me I'm convinced that
it's me that's waving around and I chicken out every time. ;-)
//
 k2bt

 * RM 1.3 02583 *


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:42 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!news
From: ac6v <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: FYI: Updated DX Reference Guide
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 07:04:47 -0700
Organization: Author
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: "ac6v@ac6v"@popd.ix.netcom.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: esc-ca2-06.ix.netcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-NETCOM-Date: Wed Oct 23  9:03:44 AM CDT 1996
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U)

Some recent addition to the AC6V Reference Guide include links or info
to:
Antenna Pages:
Beacons 1.8 MHz to 10 GHz!!; List of CQ Zones; Upcoming & past
DXpeditions; SSTV Pages; Top DXers Award; Added DX/Contest Clubs; Swan
Radio Manuals and Repair(see Mfgrs); USA AM & FM Data; Antique Radios
including the Boat Anchor Page, Collins Page, and an incredible page on
Telegragh Keys. Also don't miss the top CW speed awards on CW
Enthusiasts!

73
Rod in San Diego
--
AC6V DX Reference Page at:  http://www.netcom.com/~ac6v/index.html

Hark for I have hurled my words to the far reaches of the earth!
What King of old could do thus??
..... AC6V


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:43 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news1.mnsinc.com!usenet
From: KI4RO John <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RJ antenna?
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 21:26:07 -0700
Organization: Monumental Network Systems
Lines: 11
Distribution: inet
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54m4t0$[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: PeterHrtly <[e-mail]>

PeterHrtly wrote:
>
> Does anyone have any information on this model, or anything that sounds
> similar?
Hi Peter,
        You're probably thinking of the G5RV.  The G5RV is a center fed Zepp
specifically designed to operate on 20 meters without using a tuner,
i.e. you can plug the coax right into your transceiver.

73
John


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:44 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!southwind.net!pull-feed.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!news.icanect.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Terry Simonds)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: G5RJ antenna?
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 19:40:03 GMT
Organization: Icanect
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <54ogjj$[e-mail]>
References: <54m4t0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.142.173.27
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (PeterHrtly) wrote:

->Does anyone have any information on this model, or anything that
sounds
->similar?

Sure--It's a very common wire antenna developed by G5RV in the UK (I
think he's still alive, too). Check the ARRL Antenna handbook for
details. Very nice antenna for most bands and it works (usually) the
first time you put it up.


73--Terry/WB4FXD in Ft. Lauderdale, FL
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:45 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!panix!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!intac!magsystems!cybernet!roland.stiner
From: [e-mail] (Roland Stiner)
Date: 28 Oct 96 21:42:00
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-FTN-To: [e-mail]
Organization: MAG Systems, Inc/TFP BBS
To: [e-mail]
Subject: G5RJ antenna?
Lines: 11


P>Does anyone have any information on this model, or anything that sounds
 >similar?

What specifically do you want to know?

---
   OLX 1.53   ...73 DE:  [e-mail]


--


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:45 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.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: Goniometer feed for bal line ?
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 12:34:20 -0800
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <1996Oct29.130802@axp1>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.102.182
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

[e-mail] wrote:
> As a practical matter, does the balun feed work well?

Hi Chris, it depends on who you ask. :-) IMO, a balun feed
works best when one kills the reflections on the antenna
side of the balun and the balun sees its design impedance.
One can kill the reflections with a balanced tuner or
parallel/series reactance/stub which achieves a Z-match
on the antenna side of the balun.

With no tuning on the antenna side of the balun, one
usually has no clue what impedance the balun is seeing.
It may be 5 ohms or 5000 ohms. EZNEC will give one a close
approximation to the impedance seen by the balun.

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


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:46 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GPS Mobile Antenna?
Date: 25 Oct 1996 16:58:10 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 2
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54r9l2$[e-mail]>
References: <54qbak$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

The timing comment was a bit poorly worded... I meant 'time delay', which
is produced by the position. Tnx all fer comments.


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:47 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!qualcomm.com!nt-scsi-image
From: [e-mail] (Bill Paul)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GPS Mobile Antenna?
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 96 17:33:45 GMT
Organization: Qualcomm Inc.
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <54r8ah$[e-mail]>
References: <54pri4$[e-mail]> <54qbak$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wpaul-nt.qualcomm.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

In article <54qbak$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Fractenna) wrote:

>Incidentally, most commercial GPS systems (such as those on boats or farm
>equipment) do 'differential GPS' where they correct for the time dithering
>by using a LF (beacon) clock source as a reference. At 300 KHz you have to
>use a preamp because the antennas are electrically small and very
>inefficient.
>
>73 Chip N1IR

The differential GPS systems that I am familiar with don't use the LF beacon
for clocks or any kind of timing. They LF beacon is at a exact known location.

They take the difference from where the beacon's GPS says they are and where
they know they are, and arrive at a correction. The correction is then
transmitted on the LF band and the mobile GPS reciever which can use the
correction to resolve it's position to under 1m instead of the usual 10m.

-BP

--------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Paul   KF6BBL         San Diego, CA    [e-mail]
Disclaimer:
 The above post is the opinion of Bill Paul, not Qualcomm Inc.
--------------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:48 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!qualcomm.com!nt-scsi-image
From: [e-mail] (Bill Paul)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GPS Mobile Antenna?
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 96 18:11:14 GMT
Organization: Qualcomm Inc.
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <54ragp$[e-mail]>
References: <54qbak$[e-mail]> <54r9l2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wpaul-nt.qualcomm.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

In article <54r9l2$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Fractenna) wrote:
>The timing comment was a bit poorly worded... I meant 'time delay', which
>is produced by the position. Tnx all fer comments.

At 04:55 PM 10/25/96 -0400, you wrote:
>Timing as in 'time delay' = position.
>
>Better?
>
>73
>de Chip N1IR
>
No. You said "using a LF (beacon) clock source", which is not the case. The
beacon does not transmit timing. It transmits correction data (you know,
binary numbers). This data could arrive seconds late and still be used. It is
not timing information. Your timing comment was worded just fine. The problem
appears to be that you don't understand how the system works.

your post:
>Incidentally, most commercial GPS systems (such as those on boats or farm
>equipment) do 'differential GPS' where they correct for the time dithering
>by using a LF (beacon) clock source as a reference. At 300 KHz you have to
>use a preamp because the antennas are electrically small and very
>inefficient.
>

--------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Paul   KF6BBL         San Diego, CA    [e-mail]
Disclaimer:
 The above post is the opinion of Bill Paul, not Qualcomm Inc.
--------------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:49 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.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] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GPS Mobile Antenna?
Date: 25 Oct 1996 18:12:07 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 5
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54rdvn$[e-mail]>
References: <54r9l2$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

bPaul has the correct update; perhaps he can correct this comment for
everyone.
Tnx!

Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:51 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.sgi.com!enews.sgi.com!news-feed.inet.tele.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: h&v vs 45 degrees?
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 13:13:07 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup105-8-1.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 3.0Gold (Win16; I)
To: Peter Markham <[e-mail]>

Peter Markham wrote:
>
>   I posted this question to amsat-bb and wish to fish these waters,
> also.
>
>
>
> -------------- Enclosure number 1 ----------------
>
>    Does it make any significant difference if a typical h/v satellite
> antenna, such as the style of the KLM 22c and 44c, is oriented with
> the elements in the horizontal and vertical plane? I had reached the
> conclusion from several sources that no significant advantage would
> be gained with true circular polarization.
>
>    If the polarization is elliptical, which seems more likely, what
> difference would be realized between the antenna oriented with its
> elements parallel with and perpendicular to a "flat Earth horizon",
> and the same antenna then rotated so that its elements are at 45 degrees,
> relative to the Earth's horizon ?
>
>    I have just mounted a pair of  144mhz and 430mhz h/v beams and
> intended to play with the h/v vs 45degree mounting to determine if
> there is a real world difference for terrestrial weak signal work. Has
> anyone played the game before and determined what is optimum?
>
>    I prefer the 45 degree configuration concept as it would seem to
> minimize the interaction between the antennas and the az/el structure
> of a typical all metal G5400b setup. The intent of the antenna system
> is for  both satellite and terrestrial weak signal work.
>
>   Any and all definitive info will be appreciated. Speculation will
> merely add to my confusion  ;-)
>
>                                 Pete/wa4hei
I do not think you will notice any differenc, I have tried booth, maybee
a little less birds with 45 degrees.

SM0BKZ


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:53 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!solaris.cc.vt.edu!homer.alpha.net!news
From: Butch Kraus <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: HAM Big Sale
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 14:59:11 -0700
Organization: Alpha.net -- Milwaukee, WI
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port71.inwave.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; I)

>My girlfriend said the equipment or me.  So here's the equipment for
> >sale.
>
> >Scanner Uniden BC890XLT   $235
> >Scanner Uniden BC200XLT   $175
> >Transceiver Kenwood 440AT   $800
> >Transceiver Icom 735   $650
> >Transceiver Kenwood TM231   $250
> >Transceiver Icom 2GAT  $300
> >Transceiver Kenwood TH78A   $375
> >Antenna Tuner Icom AT500   $350
> >Amplifier  Icom IC2KL    $1250
> >Power Supply  Astron  IRS 35A    $125
> >Antenna  Telex/Hy-Gain TH5Mk2  (New in box)   $450
> >TNC  AEA PK-232MBX   $250
> >Frequency Counter Optoelectronics Portable 2810  $300
> >Heil Microphone/ Kenwood connection & stand    $130
> >
> >Let me know.
>
> Butch,


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:54 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!news.PBI.net!cbgw3.lucent.com!nntphub.cb.lucent.com!ssbunews.ih.lucent.com!mlw056!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.ham-radio,rec.ham-radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.swap,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: Ham Gear for Sale....
Date: 22 Oct 1996 13:09:57 GMT
Organization: Lucent Technologies, Indian Hill
Lines: 12
Sender: mnoble@mlw056 (ml330-Noble)
Distribution: att
Message-ID: <54ih35$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <5434en$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mlw056.mlm.lucent.com
Originator: mnoble@mlsma
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30306 rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors:160 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41037 rec.radio.amateur.misc:116874 rec.radio.swap:92111


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (M
ichael White) writes:
|> > Reason for selling is that I just got married a few months ago and
|> > either the Ham Gear or me go.
|>
|>
|> "Yeah, my wife said she'd leave me if I didn't get off the radio. Over."


Wife? I had one of those once!

Martin - G8BPV


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:55 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.prismnet.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (spiderman)
Newsgroups: rec.ham-radio,rec.ham-radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.swap,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: Ham Gear for Sale....
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 06:28:11 GMT
Organization: PrismNet - (512)-418-1568
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <54pg7o$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <5434en$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54ih35$[e-mail]> <54k6go$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup-4a.prismnet.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30420 rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors:217 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41173 rec.radio.amateur.misc:116981 rec.radio.swap:92389

Howard,

I'm sorry.  Did you say getting your wife to be a ham was the easy way
out????  I'm still trying to get mine to open the book.

Bob J.


[e-mail] (Howard Watson) wrote:

>[e-mail] wrote:


>>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Michael White) writes:
>>|> > Reason for selling is that I just got married a few months ago and
>>|> > either the Ham Gear or me go.
>>|>
>>|>
>>|> "Yeah, my wife said she'd leave me if I didn't get off the radio. Over."


>I lucked out.  I did it the easy way, just got the wife to become a
>ham also!  :>

>Howard





From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:56 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!nntp.crl.com!syix.com!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.ham-radio,rec.ham-radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.swap,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: Ham Gear for Sale....
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 96 18:15:26 GMT
Organization: Baka Engineering Service
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
 <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
 <5434en$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
 <54ih35$[e-mail]> <54k6go$[e-mail]>
 <54pg7o$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: treasure-d21.syix.com
X-Newsreader: Quarterdeck Message Center [2.00]
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30463 rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors:235 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41207 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117019 rec.radio.swap:92465

 > Reason for selling is that I just got married a few months ago and
> > either the Ham Gear or me go.
> > "Yeah, my wife said she'd leave me if I didn't get off the radio. Over."

Hah, my wife is happy when I'm playing with the radio, or the computer. At
least she KNOWS I'm not with another woman, which I might well be in someones
case.

Bill




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:57 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!news.PBI.net!j6.inktomi.com!re.hotwired.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-ana-7.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-ana-24.sprintlink.net!news.syrres.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-16.sprintlink.net!news1.sunbelt.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Web Williams)
Newsgroups: rec.ham-radio,rec.ham-radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.swap,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: Ham Gear for Sale....
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 04:07:59 GMT
Organization: Info Avenue INTERNET Access
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <5434en$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54ih35$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wmbusrmdm1.sccoast.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30542 rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors:257 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41284 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117082 rec.radio.swap:92638

On 22 Oct 1996 13:09:57 GMT, [e-mail] wrote:

>
>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (
Michael White) writes:
>|> > Reason for selling is that I just got married a few months ago and
>|> > either the Ham Gear or me go.
>|>
>|>
>|> "Yeah, my wife said she'd leave me if I didn't get off the radio. Over."
>
>
>Wife? I had one of those once!
>
>Martin - G8BPV

I'm glad you guys just reminded me, I have one of those that stays in
the other room! I forgot about her a couple of years ago. I wonder if
she's still there? ;->


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:58 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!news1.gte.net!usenet
From: "jhumphry" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.ham-radio,rec.ham-radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.swap,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: Ham Gear for Sale....
Date: 29 Oct 1996 03:31:20 GMT
Organization: homeuser
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <01bbc549$dea72100$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cust45.max19.seattle.wa.ms.uu.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30615 rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors:271 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41346 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117131 rec.radio.swap:92803




I would sure miss her, but not as much as the hamming! If she is telling
you what to do now,  you have nowhere to go but down. Good Luck NO7T

Dave Booth <[e-mail]> wrote in article
<[e-mail]>...
> Ramon Gandia wrote:
> >
> > Jim Roberson wrote:
> > >
> > > I have the following Ham Gear FOR SALE....
> > >
> > > Kenwood TS-450AT
> > > Henry 2k-4 Console Amp.
> > > Reason for selling is that I just got married a few months ago and
> > > either the Ham Gear or me go.
> >
> > Jim:
> >
> Hummm........
>
>
> By my new wife!!!!!!!!!!!
> Dave Booth kc6wfs
> http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/5860/
>


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:18:59 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!munnari.OZ.AU!news.uwa.edu.au!yarrow.wt.com.au!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Uncle)
Newsgroups: rec.ham-radio,rec.ham-radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.swap,rec.radio.swap
Subject: Re: Ham Gear for Sale....
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 23:50:36 GMT
Organization: Winthrop Technology
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <5434en$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54ih35$[e-mail]> <54k6go$[e-mail]> <54pg7o$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: net15.nw.com.au
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/16.299
X-No-Archive: yes
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30718 rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors:297 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41406 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117196 rec.radio.swap:92973

+Hah, my wife is happy when I'm playing with the radio, or the
computer. At
+least she KNOWS I'm not with another woman, which I might well be in
someones case.
+
+Bill
+
+
Well that wasn't good enough for mine.  She'd
always bitch about being a "ham's widow".  I tried
to use the 'zact same line above, but to no avail.

So now I _like_ it like that.  Play I'net when I like,
get laid when *I* like, etc.

Uncle Brian  VK6BQN

    -    -    -    -
Life isn't meaningless, it just has a poor signal to noise ratio.


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:01 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!qualcomm.com!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (John and Monica King)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: RE: Ham-Ant Digest V96 #719
Date: 24 Oct 96 21:39:20 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 75
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]


------ =_NextPart_000_01BBC1EB.8B167240
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Working on a project here and was looking for some help.  I've read and =
read and read the ARRL antenna book, but I think I'm making things worse =
as I go along.  There has to be an easier/simpler approach (I hope) to =
all of this. =20

I'm trying to work out a phasing circuit so I can get 2 vertical 1/4 =
wave antennas for 40M to work either broadside and end-fire =
bi-directional patterns.  It seems simple enough in theory - the =
antennas are placed 1/2 lambda apart (got this part) and using the =
current forcing of 1/4 lambda lines.  The example I'm referring to is on =
page 8-28, fig. 32 from the 16th Edition.  If you don't have the book =
I'll try to explain - one antenna is fed with 3/4 lambda line - the =
other is fed with either 3/4 lambda or 1/4 lambda lines by use of a =
relay switching in and out a 1/2 lambda length of cable.   I guess my =
problem is how to determine the 'electrical' length of the cable.  I've =
heard very simple explanations to extremely complicated formulas found =
in the antenna book.  What I'm looking for is how some of you have done =
this - practical explanations.  I've got two nice 8 section masts and =
guys and want to work up the cables so I can use this setup for field =
activities.  The antennas are mil-spec GRA-4 masts with grounding kits =
(8 1/4 radials for each antenna mast).

Any ideas / suggestions / war stories / actual working models ??

John King
[e-mail]
------ =_NextPart_000_01BBC1EB.8B167240
Content-Type: application/ms-tnef
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
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------ =_NextPart_000_01BBC1EB.8B167240--



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:02 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Marten Guthrie)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Ham-Antenna
Date: 22 Oct 96 04:30:07 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Can I get on your mailer list please? Address is <[e-mail]>  My
ham callsign is VE%IR /W7 in Seattle, WA.  Thank you



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:03 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!netcom-uk-feed0!news
From: Mike Tatum <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Hately EMDR Antennas ... for ALL HF bands ...
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 16:21:23 +0000
Organization: CybaTek Ltd - We've seen the future and it works!
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: news.flexnet.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Hi All,

Has anyone got one of these antennas ???

I have recently purchased both the EMDR 1 and 2, both are capable of
giving a 1:1 SWR across ALL HF HAM bands ...

The EMDR1 is only 28ft and the EMDR2 is 55ft ...
(BTW EMDR = Electro Magnetic Delay Line Radiator)

It appears to be an excellent _daytime_ inter-G antenna, however once
the F-layers start to merge during night time hours it appears to be
impossible to "get out" ...

I think this is possibly due to it radiating directly _upwards_ which
during daytime hours appears to be reflected down across the UK.

(It appears to have a VERY high angle of raditation)

Currently I have the 55ft 3-core radiator in a horizontal configuration,
however if I was to change it to _vertical_ polarisation would this help
at all as it would then be radiating in a horizontal plane from the
antenna using vertical polarisation.

The antenna uses the CFA method to radiate a wave, anyone have any more
light to shed on this style of limited space antenna???

It certainly appears to be an excellent RX antenna giving approx. 5 S
points up on a half size G5RV.

Any comments anyone ???

MikeT ...

[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:05 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!dallasI5.dallas.net!news
From: Jim <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Hately EMDR Antennas ... for ALL HF bands ...
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 16:23:03 -0800
Organization: Jim
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: aux46.plano.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)
To: [e-mail]
CC: [e-mail]

Mike Tatum wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> Has anyone got one of these antennas ???
>
 > I have recently purchased both the EMDR 1 and 2, both are capable of
 > giving a 1:1 SWR across ALL HF HAM bands ...
 >
 > The EMDR1 is only 28ft and the EMDR2 is 55ft ...
 > (BTW EMDR = Electro Magnetic Delay Line Radiator)
 >
 > It appears to be an excellent _daytime_ inter-G antenna, however once
 > the F-layers start to merge during night time hours it appears to be
 > impossible to "get out" ...
 >
 > I think this is possibly due to it radiating directly _upwards_ which
 > during daytime hours appears to be reflected down across the UK.
 >
 > (It appears to have a VERY high angle of raditation)
 >
 > Currently I have the 55ft 3-core radiator in a horizontal
configuration,
 > however if I was to change it to _vertical_ polarisation would this
help
 > at all as it would then be radiating in a horizontal plane from the
 > antenna using vertical polarisation.
 >
 > The antenna uses the CFA method to radiate a wave, anyone have any
more
 > light to shed on this style of limited space antenna???
 >
 > It certainly appears to be an excellent RX antenna giving approx. 5 S
 > points up on a half size G5RV.
 >
 > Any comments anyone ???
 >
 > MikeT ...
 >
 > [e-mail]

Mike, I am interested to see some details on this antenna. I am familiar
with the CFA antennas developed by Hately (and associates).

I even built one -a CFA- to investigate the effect but havn't followed
up.

Jim


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:06 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.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: Hately EMDR Antennas ... for ALL HF bands ...
Date: 29 Oct 1996 01:41:21 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 29
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <5548uh$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <[e-mail]>, "C.D.Sage" <[e-mail]>
writes:

>Greetings,
> I posted to this group a while back regarding the Contrawound Toroidal
>Helical Antenna and promised to keep those interested in it's development

>updated. Attached is a recent news release that you may find of interest.

> Regards,
> C.D.Sage
>
>

Actually we shouldn't laugh at these antennas. Even the military uses
them.

For example, CIA sponsored rebels from Nicarauga have wound THA antennas
around the old broken crosses suspending bent wires across fields of
graveyards.

It's the best of all worlds, they call them Contra-wound cross-field
fractal THA antennas. They have 20 dB gain over Batwing dipoles, and work
so well they can communicate with spirits in orbit over graveyards halfway
around the world.

Science is dying, Vamboo Rules (Alex Harvey, 1972).

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:07 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: "DAVE ABSHIRE" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: HELIX I THINK
Date: 29 Oct 1996 20:00:30 GMT
Organization: COMPUTER DIAGNOSTICS
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <01bbc5d3$caae1c00$375292cf@default>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 55.atlanta-035.ga.dial-access.att.net
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

I just call AES in Tampa asking about helix cable and wanted connectors and
they didn't have any or couldn't tell me anything about it.
Does anyone have any info on this cable? It looks like conduit with ribs
about 1/2 to 3/4 inch in diameter. I have about 150 foot and need a elbow
or swivel at the bottom of the tower. Its 50 ohm cable.
                                Thank you
                                Dave



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:07 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!ncar!csn!nntp-xfer-1.csn.net!news-2.csn.net!csn!nntp-xfer-2.csn.net!stortek!tatro
From: [e-mail] (Patrick Tatro)
Subject: HELP  Antenna in the Power Lines !!!!!
Message-ID: <555sva$[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: Storage Technology Corporation
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 21:29:14 GMT
Lines: 15

Help antenna in the power lines!!!! Last night the
horizontal portion of my inverted æLÆ blew into
the power lines.  It knocked out the power and
took out some of my home-brew switches but it
didnÆt get into my rig. Before the storm my
antenna was a good 15 to 20 feet from the lines
but the winds were so strong that we became mixed.
The wind also knocked down trees in my
neighborhood.

My question is , does anybody know if I am liable
for any expense/damage caused by this?

73Æs
Pat N0WCG


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:08 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news1.radix.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Chuck Spafford)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Help me figure out line noise in my house!
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 14:55:17 GMT
Organization: Cen-Trex Computer Services
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialin31.annex4.radix.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/16.227

On Tue, 22 Oct 1996 22:59:33 -0700 Jim Larson wrote in
rec.radio.amateur.antenna:

>
>I have noticed an interference lately in SEVERAL of my radios-
>which leads me to believe that the problem is not with the radios,


Start by grounding all the radios.  Grounding should alleviate almost
all line noise problems.




73, de Chuck Spafford
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:09 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!enews.sgi.com!news.sgi.com!news.cs.indiana.edu!news.nstn.ca!news.dal.ca!chebucto.ns.ca!ad330
From: [e-mail] (Raymond Baines)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Help me figure out line noise in my house!
Date: 23 Oct 1996 16:23:39 GMT
Organization: Chebucto Community Net
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <54lgqb$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: chebucto.ns.ca
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Jim Larson ([e-mail]) wrote:

: I have noticed an interference lately in SEVERAL of my radios-
: which leads me to believe that the problem is not with the radios,
: but with the envirnment they are in. If I turn the gain up at all,
: I am getting a crackling sound.  It almost sounds like noise in the
: electrical system in my house, but I have turned off all my appliances,
: lights, electrical equipment, and the noise is still there.
: Either all my radios decided to go bad at once or there is
: something interfering with their reception.........
:  Where do I start?

Start simple.....get a transistor radio that covers the same frequencies
as the radios in trouble. If that has the same noise then it looks like
noise from "other" sources outside the house. Walk around with the radio
tuned off all stations and see if you can find the source.....like the
telephone pole outside your house. Do you live near high voltage
transmission lines? They are a real source of problems. If telephone/power
pole is source, go out in the black of night and look up. Look for a blue
haze around insulators particularly on wet nights. If thats the problem
call the power company.
That will be a start for you..........


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:11 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!malgudi.oar.net!watt.oedison.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (John Wagner)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Help me figure out line noise in my house!
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 19:01:16 GMT
Organization: Ohio Edison Company, Akron OH
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <32710cf0.24625843@news>
References: <[e-mail]> <54lgqb$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: go-bus-appl4-8x.oedison.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.299

[e-mail] (Raymond Baines) wrote:

>Jim Larson ([e-mail]) wrote:
>
>: I have noticed an interference lately in SEVERAL of my radios-
>: which leads me to believe that the problem is not with the radios,
>: but with the envirnment they are in. If I turn the gain up at all,
>: I am getting a crackling sound.  It almost sounds like noise in the
>: electrical system in my house, but I have turned off all my appliances,
>: lights, electrical equipment, and the noise is still there.
>: Either all my radios decided to go bad at once or there is
>: something interfering with their reception.........
>:  Where do I start?
>
>Start simple.....get a transistor radio that covers the same frequencies
>as the radios in trouble. If that has the same noise then it looks like
>noise from "other" sources outside the house. Walk around with the radio
>tuned off all stations and see if you can find the source.....like the
>telephone pole outside your house. Do you live near high voltage
>transmission lines? They are a real source of problems. If telephone/power
>pole is source, go out in the black of night and look up. Look for a blue
>haze around insulators particularly on wet nights. If thats the problem
>call the power company.
>That will be a start for you..........

Raymond is right.  I tracked mine down with a portable radio and found
it to be a lamp that has a dimmer circuit in it.

In the past, I've had quite a few problems with lamps and fans that
have dimmer circuits in them, especially the touch sensitive lamps
with built in dimmers.

Some of the touch-sensitive lamps generate the noise you describe,
even when they appear to be "off".  Un-plugging them is the only way
to rule them out.

Good luck!
-------------------------------------------
John Wagner, Amateur Radio N8CID
Not Speaking for my Employer



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:11 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: Rikus <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Help with design of 2 meter portable Beam
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 14:11:52 -0800
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eve-wa6-05.ix.netcom.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun Oct 27  2:11:54 PM PST 1996
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I)

Need help designing a portable 2 Meter beam.
Any info greatly appreciated.
73's
[e-mail]
please mail to [e-mail]
KC7SNE


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:12 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!news.PBI.net!mothra.westworld.com!alex-a8.ptw.com
From: Jay123a <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Help with FM Scanner beam
Date: 26 Oct 96 14:02:52 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Internet Services
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mothra.westworld.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Joseph Talavera) wrote:
>Hello, I'm hoping someone out could help me out.
>
>I'm looking to receive one particular FM signal (92.9 MHz) about 250-300
>miles away.
>
>Is this possible?
>
>If so, can anyone recommend a good scanner beam design or at least a good
>scanner beam design program to help me out?
>
>My receiver, if I read it right, takes 300 and 75 (preferred) ohm antennae.
>
>
>Thanks in advanced
>
>Martin
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>Joseph Talavera                               Initiatives Group, Inc.
>[e-mail]                                    905/471-8024

>=====================================================================

Hello Joe:

A 250 to 300 mile shot at a FM station, WOW, thats a hard one. I have
used a 10 Ft. long FM broadcast band only, directional antenna ( called a
log periodic ) for stations 50 to 70 miles away. The main reason for the
use of the directional antenna was to receice stations on the other side
of a mountain range, and to eliminate multipath signals causing a
distorted received signal. The beam antenna worked great for this
application.

However a 250 to 300 mile distance recption is not do-able. Unless the
receiving antenna has gain, is directional, and is on top of a high
mountain or building, and the local FM band doesnt not have a station on
the same frequency, or ajacent frequency. I am sure this 250 to 300 mile
station could be received, but I'd give a 1% chance of success.

Jay  at  [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:14 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!node2.frontiernet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-15.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!news.be.innet.net!INbe.net!news.nl.innet.net!INnl.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!cs.utexas.edu!news.ti.com!usenet
From: FITR BV/N0IAT <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: HELP: tuner wont tune on 17M
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 10:27:25 -0800
Organization: Texas Instruments Asia,   Taipei Taiwan ROC
Lines: 62
Message-ID: <[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 3.0 (Win16; I)

Hi folks -- here's a small problem:

I have a close-to-resonant dipole on 17M.  However, VSWR is about
1.7:1 due to mounting situation.   I have a cheap no-name antenna
tuner.  Near as I can tell, the tuner is a pi-network, and is using
a switched inductor and 2 variable capacitors.  The inductor switch is
simply labeled alphabetically (a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h,i,j,k,l) rather than
by band (80-40-20-etc).   Power handling looks to be about 100 watts,
though the box claims 300 W PEP (yea....riiight).  The inductor is
tapped every turn, but each subsequent tap point is offset from the
previous tap point (slightly) to avoid shorting.  The coil appears
to be from B&W (perhaps airdux).

I am unable to use the tuner on 17M, as I am NEVER able to find a
match below 2:1.  This includes using resonant and non-resonant
antennas.

Even using a dummy load as an "antenna", I cant get the tuner to match
on 17M.  The tuner just DOES NOT LIKE 17M, it seems.  The tuner works
fine on 10,12,15,20,30,and 40M (never tried 75 or 80).

Is it possible to use one of the switch settings originally
intended for 75 or 80M and re-tap the inductor coil specifically for
17M usage?  My guess is that the tap intervals for the higher bands are
too far apart -- that is, I either need a bit MORE or a bit LESS
inductance than the tuner's "normal" tap intervals.

My concerns are:

Other than trying the various tap points manually, is there a better
way to calculate if my re-tapped coil will work properly on 17M?  I
would assume that I would try to maximize Capacitance, and go for
the lowest inductance for a 1:1 match.  Any other advice?

1.  the inductor is "indented" where the leads from the inductor
    switch connect to the inductor.  I assume this is to prevent
    shorting or voltage arcs.   How would I "indent" a tap point
    without breaking the plastic holding the coil to form?

2.  Any other advice on modifying a tuner?   Perhaps this one was
    pre WARC days and was never tested/optimized for 17M.   If I
    recall, 17M was the "last" of the WARC bands to open, so maybe
    the engineers didnt care about 17M at the time.

3.  I purposely selected this tuner over a torroid based pi network
    tuner to minimize losses.  Was this a correct assumption?


Tom, Jack, Cecil, and all others:  thanks in advance for any insight.
You are to be commended for your ever-insightful comments on antennas,
feedline, tuners, and grounds.  This is one of the most educational
newsgroups on the internet.

73,
Joe

----------------------------------------------------------
Amateur Radio:  BV/N0IAT   Taipei TAIWAN Republic of China
    http://www.transend.com.tw/~joentam/index1.html
ex.  7J1AOF (Japan)  YU3/N0IAT (Slovenia)  KA0ZDH (Novice)
Licensed Radio Amateur since 1986.  Comments are mine only.
----------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:16 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!tezcat!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.winterlan.com!frii.com!usenet
From: Avatar <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HELP: tuner wont tune on 17M
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 17:15:08 -0800
Organization: Front Range Internet, Inc.
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftc-83.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)

FITR BV/N0IAT wrote:
>
> Hi folks -- here's a small problem:
>
> I have a close-to-resonant dipole on 17M.  However, VSWR is about
> 1.7:1 due to mounting situation.   I have a cheap no-name antenna
> tuner.  Near as I can tell, the tuner is a pi-network, and is using
> a switched inductor and 2 variable capacitors.  The inductor switch is
> simply labeled alphabetically (a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h,i,j,k,l) rather than
> by band (80-40-20-etc).   Power handling looks to be about 100 watts,
> though the box claims 300 W PEP (yea....riiight).  The inductor is
> tapped every turn, but each subsequent tap point is offset from the
> previous tap point (slightly) to avoid shorting.  The coil appears
> to be from B&W (perhaps airdux).
>
> I am unable to use the tuner on 17M, as I am NEVER able to find a
> match below 2:1.  This includes using resonant and non-resonant
> antennas.
> snip
>
> 73,
> Joe
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Amateur Radio:  BV/N0IAT   Taipei TAIWAN Republic of China
>     http://www.transend.com.tw/~joentam/index1.html
> ex.  7J1AOF (Japan)  YU3/N0IAT (Slovenia)  KA0ZDH (Novice)
> Licensed Radio Amateur since 1986.  Comments are mine only.
> ----------------------------------------------------------

I'm not going to try to answer all of your questions. A problem
encountered in some tuners is "suck out." The distributed capacitance of
the inductor resonates with the inductor and the input signal is not
properly sent to the output terminal. Since the tuner was built before
the 17M band was operational, I expect the tuner was not tested on that
frequency when it was designed. The more frequencies a tuner has to cover
the more apt it is to have a suck out problem. I suggest you just build a
tuner for that band rather than chase the problem with modifications that
will probably result in more problems.

73's
W0MAY
Dave



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:17 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF Polarization
Date: 23 Oct 1996 11:23:51 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 52
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54lda7$[e-mail]>
References: <54kfqm$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <54kfqm$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:

>exclusively to 40 and 80, and with the gain antennae to hear it, I can
>confirm
>that arrival signals to my part of the world via the polar paths do NOT
>always
>arrive from the expected headings!  They often appear to be bent around
the
>most direct path over the poles, arriving from 20 or more degrees off
path on
>"good" nights to see the effect.
>On "good" nights for this, I have noticed that not only is a polarity
problem
>really evident, but the signal is apparently wandering from side to side
at
>the same time and wavering from different arrival angles as well.   It is

>when the effect is most pronounced that the familiar hollow sounding echo

>shows up we hear that is, to finally answer your first question, almost
>always at this location confined to polar paths on 40 meters.

And in Ohio, and here in Georgia, I observe the very same thing.

During morning skeds with VS6DO from Ohio (I could work him three morings
out of seven average, and hear him 5 out of seven) I received on a phased
loop array. His signal would vary from SW to NW, somethimes being on two
very widely separated paths at any moment.  VK's and ZL's do the same,
however it is much less obvious.

Over the pole paths are very obvious in demonstrating this effect.

At a monitoring station with an active heading display, I watched short
skip low HF signals do the same thing.

The problem is the ionosphere re-radiates the signal from many different
areas of the sky with many different tilts and phase delays between the
areas re-radiating the same signal. That's why signals are so unsteady,
and appear to come from different directions of the sky over very short
time periods. Since the effect is totally random and varies from minute to
minute, as well as day to day, you'd be hard pressed to combine these
signals in a "dumb" diversity system.

On the other hand, if an antenna is focused on one small area of the sky,
the re-radiation from other areas of the sky does not bother anything. It
simply isn't heard, so it can't randomly add and subtract from the other
path. That's why transmitting and receiving antennas both have less SHORT
term fading when they are very direction plane wave radiators, and the
long term fading is so slow it's easy to change antenna patterns to
compensate.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:17 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!ennfs.eas.asu.edu!news.asu.edu!aztec.asu.edu!hamop
From: [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF Polarization
Date: 24 Oct 1996 17:46:27 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <54oa1j$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aztec.asu.edu


Bob Bruhns said :
The inverted V seems to put out horizontal polarization broadside, and
vertical polarization off the ends.

Bob,
        So does a simple horizontal dipole
Charlie, W7XC
--


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:19 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.randomc.com!news.miracle.net!wariat.org!news.apk.net!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!news.ysu.edu!news.cps.udayton.edu!news.conterra.com!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.zeitgeist.net!wizard.pn.com!news.gte.com!news-in.tiac.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!li.net!bbruhns
From: [e-mail] (Bob Bruhns)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HF Polarization
Date: 22 Oct 1996 02:22:17 GMT
Organization: LI Net (Long Island Network)
Lines: 76
Message-ID: <54hb4p$[e-mail]>
References: <54bcik$[e-mail]> <54dpie$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: linet01.li.net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

W8JI  Tom ([e-mail]) wrote:
: The biggest problem at HF is true circular polarization requires the
: horizontal antenna be at least close to a half wave above ground, so
: it reasonably matches the radation pattern of a vertical.

: The only case I can think of where combining two low antennas could
: help is for high angle (short distance) skywave. That could be done
: if two crossed dipoles were fed to give high angle circular polarity.

  I have not tried it yet, but I have long suspected that a
right-angle pair of inverted-V dipoles with around a 90 degree apex,
and fed 1/4 wave out of phase, would do it.  I have examined the
predicted patterns of turnstile inverted V's with Mininec, and at
around 1/4 to 3/8 wavelength height and around 90 degrees or so apex
angle, the V and H fields can match fairly well over much of the sky.
The inverted V seems to put out horizontal polarization broadside, and
vertical polarization off the ends.  It's my hope that a perpendicular
pair might generate CP of the same sense over the sky.  But all I
have actually tried so far is a perpendicular pair of rather distorted
vertical loops.

: Another problem is usually there is phase and amplitude multi-path
: present, and that destroys the value of a circular receiving antenna. The
: only sucessful commercial applications of polarity or space diversity use
: multiple receivers and a "smart" voting system.

  I think the voter idea would be best, except I would need to
homebrew a dual front end receiver.  But I found that CP of the
appropriate sense seems to help reception most of the time.  On 75
meters, my antenna clearly gets stronger reception of "local" (450
mile radius) signals when configured for one sense during the day,
and the other sense at night.  This has been consistent from my first
experiments in late 1993, until now.  And at night, I hear European DX
best in the opposite sense configuration from the optimum for local
reception.  Of course, my antennas are hardly of truly scientific
quality; maybe this is a directional effect.  But I don't know why the
optimum sense configuration would reverse between night and day, for
local signals.

: TRANSMITTING on dual polarity antennas over HF skywave paths
: actually increases fading, because it aggrivates multipath problems.

  My 75 meter TX tests were all sub-500-mile paths, not DX.  And, they
were limited, because unfortunately I have too many nearby neighbors
with RFI problems.  But I found that the optimum TX sense also
reversed night to day, and I got comments that my signal strength was
much steadier than the other stations in the QSO.  On RX, reception is
more steady, and I can sometimes hear a distinct improvement in
reception quality of 75 meter AM signals, as though a phasing or
flanging sound has been removed, when I select the optimum sense.
But, neither sense seems to be better than the other around sunrise
and sunset.  And, even at those times when fading is significantly
reduced, signals do still fade.  A receiver-voter could still help.

  Using 1/4 wave of phasing line, I have to reverse the connection
when I switch between TX and RX.  That is, whether the daytime or
nighttime conditions are prevailing (and therefore whichever sense is
optimum), I have to put the extra line in series with one antenna for
optimum TX, and in series with the other antenna for optimum receive.
I don't know if this means I am transmitting and receiving the same
sense or the opposite sense... but TX and RX are always "opposite" in
this way, and they both reverse day and night.

: The most effective receiving arrays I've used were always simply
: very directional systems with clean patterns focused on the desired
: direction. The better focused, the less fading and better S/N ratio
: the arrays have.

  I imagine that focussing on one path would reduce the effects of
other paths, with their massively different delays, and it would also
apply gain to the equation; that certainly should improve things.  I
have no experience with really focussed path control on 75, only with
wide dispersion local ragchew stuff.

  Bob Bruhns, WA3WDR, [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:20 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!ulowell.uml.edu!aspen!sullivand
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: hf9v review
Date: 28 Oct 96 19:14:25 -0500
Organization: Univ. of Massachusetts-Lowell
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <1996Oct28.191425.1@aspen>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aspen.uml.edu

 Recently I built an Hf9v by Butternut and i am not happy with it. i know this
is an old antenna but for new people here are some warnings. first the
Direction stink. They are not articulate in getting their message across. How
many not so gifted types can tell between a #10 and #8 screw. i can't, I had t
o
find someone who could.
 Next At least one of the links between the telescoping aluminum sections in
not well designed. You'll see which one should you build it, so be prepared to
get a hose clamp for security. Also, while you do get extra hardware, always a
bonus, if you build the associated counterpoise kit you don't get enough 75 oh
m
coax to build a choke, be prepared to do connecter work after you go out and
buy some more.
 Performance isn't bad. I have it mounted about four stories up on a building
at school here, but the maching and tuning is a major nightmare. Two hours of
tuning wasn't enough, be prepared to take a saturday to accomplish this feat.

If this doesn't deter you from purcahsing this unit then fine. Take my advice
and work slowly and wear rubber gloves. The anti oxidant will harm you as it i
s
a heavy metal compund. I was lucky and warned ahead of time. Enjoy and good
hunting.
Dan Sullivan N1LYJ
Lowell Mass



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:21 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.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: How do you measure radiation resistance?
Date: 29 Oct 1996 11:41:29 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 46
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <555c3p$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

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

>
>Can anyone explain how to go about measuring an antenna's
>radiation resistance? I have several designs where the
>feed point resistance is not the same as the radiation
>resistance but I've never seen anything written on how
>to go about determining what the radiation resitance is.
>
>Can anyone help?
>
>
>Ed--AC3L
>
>

Hi Ed,

It is only by pure blind luck that radiation resistance would EVER equal
the feedpoint impedance. The feedpoint impedance includes all resistive
losses, as well as impedance transformations to these values caused by the
antenna system itself.

You can measure radiation resistance by measuring the total power radiated
and dividing that power by the square of the current causing the
radiation. That is the IRE definition. Since the total power radiated IS
NOT the same as the total power applied to the antenna, this always
requires complex measurement of field strength over the entire sphere of
radiation on a test range, as well as vector measurement of currents in
the radiator.

Another way is by illuminating the antenna by a known uniform radiation
field, and measuring the power extracted from that field by the antenna,
knowing the antenna's directivity, and the current caused by that external
excitation.

The radiation resistance can be estimated in simple antennas, and formulas
are available. But more important might be the reason you want to know the
radiation resistance, since it is one of the most misused and abused terms
thrown around. It tells us NOTHING about efficiency, gain , or directivity
unless we know many other parameters. Only in very specific cases can it
be useful at all.

So I wonder why you want to know it?

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:22 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.magicnet.net!feed1.news.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] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How do you measure radiation resistance?
Date: 29 Oct 1996 18:04:27 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 4
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <5562hr$[e-mail]>
References: <555c3p$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Tom, he just wants to know if you can measure it--if you don't want to
answer his question then just STAY OFF!

Chip


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:24 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How do you measure radiation resistance?
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 20:43:00 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <555c3p$[e-mail]> <5562hr$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 144.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Fractenna wrote:
>
> Tom, he just wants to know if you can measure it--if you don't want to
> answer his question then just STAY OFF!
>
> Chip


altavoz: Ha ha ha ha ha ....his name is Edward , not TOM
ha ha ha hahahh ha


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:25 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!btnet!btinternet!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jason Williams-Lock)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.electromag,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: how does a quarter-wave transformer work ?
Date: 25 Oct 1996 21:12:17 GMT
Organization: none
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <54rafh$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: host-73-35-167.btinternet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.8 (16bit)
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.physics.electromag:14583 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30441

Hello to the group!

This is a question that hopefully someone in the group with some professional
experience and knowledge may be able to answer.

My question concerns transmission-line theory and energy flow and storage,
but to the special case of a transmission-line a "quarter-wavelength" long.
Such a length of transmission-line is known as the so called
"quarter-wavelength" transformer and is commonly used in antenna systems to
match an antenna (for example a single dipole) to a transmission-line of
different impedance (for example, 450-ohm open-wire ladder-line).

I can imagine that there are standing waves on the quarter-wave transformer,
but I don't know how it achieves the matching, I would appreciate any help
from someone who knows about quarter-wave transformers, or has a good
knowledge base and experience in antenna systems, theory and practice.

Thankyou for your help, comments and suggestions, they will be much
appreciated!

Regards,

Jason



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:26 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: how does a quarter-wave transformer work ?
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 96 15:24:53 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54rafh$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1d.delphi.com
X-To: Jason Williams-Lock <[e-mail]>

Jason Williams-Lock <[e-mail]> writes:

>from someone who knows about quarter-wave transformers, or has a good
>knowledge base and experience in antenna systems, theory and practice.

Take a look at an SWR circle on a Smith Chart (ARRL Antenna
Book). A quarter-wave length of transmission line takes you
halfway around that circle. That changes the magnitude and
or phase relationship between the voltage and the current.

One point of interest is taking a low resistance to a high
resistance or visa versa. This is probably the most common
application of a quarter-wave transformer.

However, one can transform both resistances and reactances
with a quarter-wave transformer. Capacitive reactance
is transformed to inductive reactance and visa versa.

Since impedance is equal to voltage divided by current,
changing the magnitude and/or phase relationship
between the voltage and the current changes the
impedance.

73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC

PS - assume a quarter-wavelength of 75 ohm line feeding
a 100 ohm antenna. SWR on the 75 ohm coax is 1.5.
The impedance at the antenna is 75*1.5 and the
impedance a quarter-wavelength from the antenna
is 75/1.5 and that equals the magic 50 ohms.


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:28 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.mathworks.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsgate.compuserve.com!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.electromag,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: how does a quarter-wave transformer work ?
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 21:32:16 -0700
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54rafh$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.physics.electromag:14594 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30527

Jason Williams-Lock wrote:
> My question concerns transmission-line theory and energy flow and storage,
> but to the special case of a transmission-line a "quarter-wavelength" long.
> Such a length of transmission-line is known as the so called
> "quarter-wavelength" transformer and is commonly used in antenna systems to
> match an antenna (for example a single dipole) to a transmission-line of
> different impedance (for example, 450-ohm open-wire ladder-line).
>
> I can imagine that there are standing waves on the quarter-wave transformer,
> but I don't know how it achieves the matching, I would appreciate any help
> from someone who knows about quarter-wave transformers, or has a good
> knowledge base and experience in antenna systems, theory and practice.
> Jason

altavoz: Going from a 100+j00 antenna toward the radio, then thru a 1/4w
70 ohm coax, then thru any length of 50 ohm coax. The 1/4w 70 ohm coax
converts the 100 antenna to 50 ohms to please the radio. Any 1/4wave
coax will transform one end to its opposite. a shorted 1/4wave
will look open at the other end . Slightly shorten the shorted 1/4w
and it's open end looks inductive 45+j10 , lengthen it past 1/4w
and it looks capacitive 45-J10. Aproaching  1/2 w it looks 10-J5 .

SQR OF THE PRODUCT OF THE 2 IMPEDENCES .





______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:29 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!seismo!news.er.usgs.gov!jobone!lynx.unm.edu!SantaFe!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jim Potter)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.electromag,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: how does a quarter-wave transformer work ?
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 04:43:11 GMT
Organization: The Santa Fe Institute
Lines: 79
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54rafh$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial147.roadrunner.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.299
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.physics.electromag:14597 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30537

[e-mail] (Jason Williams-Lock) wrote:

>Hello to the group!
>
>This is a question that hopefully someone in the group with some professional

>experience and knowledge may be able to answer.
>
>My question concerns transmission-line theory and energy flow and storage,
>but to the special case of a transmission-line a "quarter-wavelength" long.
>Such a length of transmission-line is known as the so called
>"quarter-wavelength" transformer and is commonly used in antenna systems to
>match an antenna (for example a single dipole) to a transmission-line of
>different impedance (for example, 450-ohm open-wire ladder-line).
>
>I can imagine that there are standing waves on the quarter-wave transformer,
>but I don't know how it achieves the matching, I would appreciate any help
>from someone who knows about quarter-wave transformers, or has a good
>knowledge base and experience in antenna systems, theory and practice.
>
>Thankyou for your help, comments and suggestions, they will be much
>appreciated!
>
>Regards,
>
>Jason
>
In terms of transmission line theory, for a simple, uniform
transmission line (tw0-port), the voltage and current at one port can
be related to the voltage and current at the other port by a matrix.
the matrix is called the chain matrix because a network of cascaded
two-ports can be represented by the product of the individual matrices
for each element of the network.

For a transmission line of length el with a characteristic impedance
of z0, the matrix  M is (where theta, the electrical length, is
2*pi*el/lambda)

M=                        cos theta             j z0 sin theta
                          (/z0) sin theta         cos theta

The voltage current vector at one end is V1

I1

and at the other end  V2
                                           I2

The relation is V2   =  M  V1
                              I2               I1

And the impedances are Z1= V1/I1 and Z2=V2/I2.

in the case of a quarter-wave transformer theta = pi/2 and the matrix
reduces to

M =    0       j z0
          j/z0    0

Thus V2 =  j Z0 I1
            I2      (j/Z0) V1

and the impedance Z2 = (Z0^2)/Z1.

Thus for example with a 50 ohm line, 25 ohms gets transformed to 100
ohms (and vice-versa).  Also, note that an inductive reactance becomes
a capacitive reactance (and v-v).

Fun stuff. No fancy E&M in this approach, but it's easy enough to
derive the transmission line equations and the matrix representation
from Maxwell's equations.

Jim Potter


James M. Potter, President              TEL: [phone]
JP Accelerator Works, Inc.              FAX: [phone]
2245 47th Street                        EMAIL: [e-mail]
Los Alamos, NM 87544-1604               URL: http://www.jpaw.com



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:30 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!seismo!news.er.usgs.gov!jobone!lynx.unm.edu!SantaFe!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jim Potter)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.electromag,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: how does a quarter-wave transformer work ?
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 04:56:44 GMT
Organization: The Santa Fe Institute
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54rafh$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial147.roadrunner.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.299
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.physics.electromag:14598 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30538

Another way to look at it is in terms of forward and reflected waves.
The reflected wave toward the generator is the sum of the reflected
wave from the input to the quarter wave transformer and the reflected
wave (delayed by one-half period) from the out put of the transformer.
Of course added to that is whatever reflected wave there is from the
load.  If you assume the load is matched  or resistive at the output
terminal, it is possible to choose an impedance for the transformer
such that the two reflections are equal and, because of the
half-period delay, cancel.

If the load is R0 and the characteristic impedance of the generator
transmission line is Z0, the desired transformer impedance Z1 to get a
match is such that Z1/R0 = Z0/Z1, which says that the mismatch at each
port is the same. Thus, Z1 = SQRT(Z0 R0) or Z0= Z1^2/R0 which is a
special case of the more general result obtained in the previous note.

Jim Potter


James M. Potter, President              TEL: [phone]
JP Accelerator Works, Inc.              FAX: [phone]
2245 47th Street                        EMAIL: [e-mail]
Los Alamos, NM 87544-1604               URL: http://www.jpaw.com



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:31 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uwm.edu!newsspool.doit.wisc.edu!wiscnews.wiscnet.net!odo.msoe.edu!lundgrew
From: Lundgren William E <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: How to Build A Rhombic?
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 13:25:21 -0600
Organization: University of Wisconsin, Madison
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: odo.msoe.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII


Hi and thanks for reading,

     After looking at an article in QST about an Ohio group who setup
shop at the VOA site adn used rhombic antennas, I started to investigate
them. (the antennas that is)
     I've heard so much about what a great antenna they are (provided yo
have the room) and that they perform very well.  My only question is does
anyone know the formula to build one, has anyone built one, and what
exactly do you need for support, feeding, etc.  Any infor anyone has would
be appreciated.

TNX es 73
de Bill Lundgren

*************************************
   MILWAUKEE SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING

      AMATEUR RADIO ASSOCIATION

             W 9 H H X
       [e-mail]
       Bill Lundgren, N9WTQ
*************************************



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:33 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.monmouth.com!news
From: Robert Bissett <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How to Build A Rhombic?
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 19:24:02 -0400
Organization: Nov Schmoz Kapop
Lines: 49
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp15.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: Lundgren William E <[e-mail]>

Lundgren William E wrote:
>
> Hi and thanks for reading,
>
>      After looking at an article in QST about an Ohio group who setup
> shop at the VOA site adn used rhombic antennas, I started to investigate
> them. (the antennas that is)
>      I've heard so much about what a great antenna they are (provided yo
> have the room) and that they perform very well.  My only question is does
> anyone know the formula to build one, has anyone built one, and what
> exactly do you need for support, feeding, etc.  Any infor anyone has would
> be appreciated.
>
> TNX es 73
> de Bill Lundgren
>
> *************************************
>    MILWAUKEE SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING
>
>       AMATEUR RADIO ASSOCIATION
>
>              W 9 H H X
>        [e-mail]
>        Bill Lundgren, N9WTQ
> *************************************

Is someone trying to pull something here? It is hard to believe that
you don't have this information at your fingertips.
 Lets see...
  You are N9WTQ...... at least a General class
   Amateur Radio Association of Milwaukee School of ENGINEERING....
    University of Wisconsin.....

    You mean you don't have The ARRL handbook?
      You don't have the ARRL antenna book?
         There is no library at that school of ENGINEERING?
          No library at the University of Wisconson?

  You want all that information in an newsgroup?  The relevant
info in the ARRL antenna book takes 14 pages!

  Give us a break, RTFM!

 ND2L

--
      *********
Bob Bissett      [e-mail]
      *********


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:33 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!panix!feed1.news.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: How to Build A Rhombic?
Date: 29 Oct 1996 16:54:36 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <555csc$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <554ff0$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr15s2.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <554ff0$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]>,
>Lundgren William E <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>>
>>    I've heard so much about what a great antenna they are (provided yo
>>have the room) and that they perform very well.  My only question is does
>>anyone know the formula to build one, has anyone built one, and what
>>exactly do you need for support, feeding, etc.  Any infor anyone has
>>would be appreciated.
>>

>The real advantage of a Rhombic is simple construction and bandwidth, not
>gain. You can get more gain in much less space with many antennas,
>including the smaller curtains used at VOA.
>
>73 Tom

Which is EXACTLY why the VOA supplanted them with the curtains.  I wish
all our government's decisions were that well made.

  :)

//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:34 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!newsspool.doit.wisc.edu!wiscnews.wiscnet.net!odo.msoe.edu!lundgrew
From: Lundgren William E <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How to Build A Rhombic?
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 13:26:57 -0600
Organization: University of Wisconsin, Madison
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <554ff0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: odo.msoe.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
To: W8JI  Tom <[e-mail]>
In-Reply-To: <554ff0$[e-mail]>

>
> Hi Bill,
>

> The ARRL Antenna Handbook will give you construction details, but the gain
> will be much less than predicted. The real advantage of a Rhombic is
> simple construction and bandwidth, not gain. You can get more gain in much
> less space with many antennas, including the smaller curtains used at VOA.

     Thanks for the information Tom. You're the only one who answered this
question in a civil manor. I don't know what the deal was, but
I got several pieces of hate mail for posting this question in the
newsgroup.  Guess several amoung the ranks of amateurs need to get
something else to do if all they can do is write hate mail to people.
HAHA.  Of course, their all probobly members of the 3898 "knowledge
squad."
     I appreciate the added information about the curtains too.  I'll have
to do a bit of research into them.  73 and see you on the air perhaps.
Again, thanks for answering without flaming me.

de N9WTQ




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:36 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news.efn.org!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Dick Hughes)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How to Build A Rhombic?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 00:18:17 GMT
Organization: Oregon Public Networking
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <554ff0$[e-mail]> <555csc$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dynip157.efn.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.299

On 29 Oct 1996 16:54:36 GMT, [e-mail] wrote:

>In <554ff0$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) writes:
>>In article <[e-mail]>,
>>Lundgren William E <[e-mail]> writes:
>>
>>>
>>>    I've heard so much about what a great antenna they are (provided yo
>>>have the room) and that they perform very well.  My only question is does
>>>anyone know the formula to build one, has anyone built one, and what
>>>exactly do you need for support, feeding, etc.  Any infor anyone has
>>>would be appreciated.
>>>
>
>>The real advantage of a Rhombic is simple construction and bandwidth, not
>>gain. You can get more gain in much less space with many antennas,
>>including the smaller curtains used at VOA.
>>
>>73 Tom
>
>Which is EXACTLY why the VOA supplanted them with the curtains.  I wish
>all our government's decisions were that well made.
>
>  :)
>
>//-----------------------------
>Mike - W5WQN


Yes, but there was something really satisfying about the rhombics used
at W6AM when they burned holes through the ether.  I think they had
something like 8 wave-lengths per leg.  When he hit the switch back in
the AM days, you had to have everything nailed down in your shack.

Dick Hughes - W6CCD


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:37 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.logical.net!news.wizvax.net!wizvax.wizvax.net!kb2hun
From: William R Liporace <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Hustler G7-144 info needed
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 15:01:42 -0500
Organization: Wizvax Communications, Troy, N.Y. 12180 USA
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wizvax.wizvax.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

I have a G-7-144 hustler antenna.  It was given to me without instuctions
and I believe a part missing!?  Can Anyone help me ??
TNX Will KB2HUN

William Liporace KB2HUN          [e-mail]
763 Huntingdon Drive             KB2HUN @ K2TR (yccc packet cluster)
Niskayuna, NY 12309              KB2HUN @ WA2PVV (NEDA)
518-346-3804 home                518-471-2837 work



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:38 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!enews.sgi.com!decwrl!tribune.usask.ca!rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!mongol.sasknet.sk.ca![e-mail]
From: (Copper Penny)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: importance of coax length for C.B.
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 02:38:44 GMT
Organization: SaskNet News Distribution
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eagle19.sk.sympatico.ca
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227

Can someone out there please help. Is the length of the coax for a
base or a mobile setup important for the C.B. band, will it affect the
swr or not.
Any comments or opinions would be welcome.
Thanks in advance,

Copper Penny.


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:39 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!myth.vianet.on.ca!newsfeed.vivanet.com!imci5!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!iglou!iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: importance of coax length for C.B.
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services (1-800-436-4456)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 13:07:54 GMT
Lines: 17

For CB I recommend 17ft of coax then a large, glass insulator, then 42
more ft of coax to the antenna. Key down the CB for 3 hours after
installation to seat in the new coax.



Copper Penny () wrote:
: Can someone out there please help. Is the length of the coax for a
: base or a mobile setup important for the C.B. band, will it affect the
: swr or not.
: Any comments or opinions would be welcome.
: Thanks in advance,

: Copper Penny.

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


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:39 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!newsfeed.concentric.net!news.texas.net!news1.best.com!news.sgi.com!csulb.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!news-feed.inet.tele.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: importance of coax length for C.B.
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 11:28:04 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: 130.244.113.162
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-User: s-12444
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01b1Gold (Win16; I)
To: Copper Penny <>

Copper Penny wrote:
>
> Can someone out there please help. Is the length of the coax for a
> base or a mobile setup important for the C.B. band, will it affect the
> swr or not.
> Any comments or opinions would be welcome.
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Copper Penny.
Will not affect SWR of the antenna at all.
M


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:40 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.voicenet.com!netnews.upenn.edu!news.misty.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.texas.net!news
From: my name <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: importance of coax length for C.B.
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 13:17:15 -0700
Organization: my company
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-1-19.nash.voyageronline.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E-KIT  (Win16; U)

Copper Penny wrote:
>
> Can someone out there please help. Is the length of the coax for a
> base or a mobile setup important for the C.B. band, will it affect the
> swr or not.
> Any comments or opinions would be welcome.
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Copper Penny.


Measuring the SWR at the antenna is the most accurate but not many of us
can do that.  If the antenna feed impedance is not close to 50 ohms
changing the length of the coax will appear to make the SWR change (when
in fact it won't).  To measure the correct SWR at the operating position
cut the coax to a multiple of 1/2 wavelengths from the antenna:
(468 x .66 / freq in mhz = length in ft.).  There are several good books
on the subject that you need to have.
   Because you DO seem to recognize the importance of antenna matching
(which is really a toughie for a lot of us) I encourage you to study to
become a ham.  There must be lots of us around you.
   BTW, posting on a ham "thread" is ok but minimize the use of the term
CB and don't use your CB handle.  You won't offend some of the Trolls.
                                Regards,
                                 Mike K5WIM


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:41 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.uoregon.edu!news.efn.org!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Dick Hughes)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: importance of coax length for C.B.
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 13:53:27 GMT
Organization: Oregon Public Networking
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dynip110.efn.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.299

On Sat, 26 Oct 1996 02:38:44 GMT, (Copper Penny) wrote:

>Can someone out there please help. Is the length of the coax for a
>base or a mobile setup important for the C.B. band, will it affect the
>swr or not.
>Any comments or opinions would be welcome.
>Thanks in advance,
>
>Copper Penny.

No.  SWR is determined by the load, not the coax length.  You cannot
vary the SWR of the antenna by changing the length.  You will,
however, see a difference on an SWR meter.  Doesn't change anything.

Dick Hughes - W6CCD


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:42 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-8.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!mr.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!enews.sgi.com!decwrl!tribune.usask.ca!rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!mongol.sasknet.sk.ca![e-mail]
From: (Copper Penny)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: importance of coax length for C.B.
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 18:27:40 GMT
Organization: SaskNet News Distribution
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: argus16.sk.sympatico.ca
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227

On Sat, 26 Oct 1996 13:07:54 GMT, [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
wrote:

>For CB I recommend 17ft of coax then a large, glass insulator, then 42
>more ft of coax to the antenna. Key down the CB for 3 hours after
>installation to seat in the new coax.
>
>
>
>Copper Penny () wrote:
>: Can someone out there please help. Is the length of the coax for a
>: base or a mobile setup important for the C.B. band, will it affect the
>: swr or not.
>: Any comments or opinions would be welcome.
>: Thanks in advance,
>
>: Copper Penny.
>
>--
>Steve Ellington [e-mail]  Louisville, Ky
Oh boy Steve now that was a brilliant answer, I ask a simple question
and you come up with this stupid response. Next time keep it to
yourself.

Copper Penny.


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:43 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: importance of coax length for C.B.
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 18:59:14 -0700
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Copper Penny wrote:
>
> Can someone out there please help. Is the length of the coax for a
> base or a mobile setup important for the C.B. band, will it affect the
> swr or not.
> Any comments or opinions would be welcome.
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Copper Penny.


altavoz: The attenuation on a coax at 27 mhz is low compared
with the upper bands like 2 meter,440. You wont need foam
RG8 for CB as the losses are not a problem. But its the loss
that can hide a high SWR thru attenuation. So 10:1 at 27 mhz
will mean 4:1 SWR at radio ( 100 foot , RG8). At VHF it gets
very interesting !
  With high SWR , you can clip the coax in small increments
without changing the SWR ( except thru lower attenuation)
and the radio cycles thru pure but low resistance , then reactive,
then pure but high resistance....etc. If the radio can
tolerate one of these higher , pure resistances, you have a
match , but with a "HIGHLY TUNED" line , which means you could
do the coax harm thru voltage breakdown .
  MFJ has some great $100 boxes that read SWR and coax attenuation.
You can sweep a band without "setting" the SWR meter .

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:44 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: importance of coax length for C.B.
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 19:16:18 -0700
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

my name wrote:
>
> Copper Penny wrote:
> >
> > Can someone out there please help. Is the length of the coax for a
> > base or a mobile setup important for the C.B. band, will it affect the
> > swr or not.
> > Any comments or opinions would be welcome.
> > Thanks in advance,
> >
> > Copper Penny.
>
> Measuring the SWR at the antenna is the most accurate but not many of us
> can do that.  If the antenna feed impedance is not close to 50 ohms
> changing the length of the coax will appear to make the SWR change (when
> in fact it won't).  To measure the correct SWR at the operating position
> cut the coax to a multiple of 1/2 wavelengths from the antenna:
> (468 x .66 / freq in mhz = length in ft.).  There are several good books
> on the subject that you need to have.
>    Because you DO seem to recognize the importance of antenna matching
> (which is really a toughie for a lot of us) I encourage you to study to
> become a ham.  There must be lots of us around you.
>    BTW, posting on a ham "thread" is ok but minimize the use of the term
> CB and don't use your CB handle.  You won't offend some of the Trolls.
>                                 Regards,
>                                  Mike K5WIM



altavoz: reading SWR opposite the antenna ( at the radio) will only
increase as you cut the coax. You cant , at the radio, change SWR
except to increase it as you shorten the coax. If you make very small
cuts, the SWR will increase very smooth and linearly. There will be
no jumps in the readings.
  Moving towards the antenna, the SWR increases due to the attenuation
of the coax . The coax is hiding the true SWR at the antenna , from the
radio.
 The true standing waves on the coax will be worst( most destructive)
at the antenna , cause the voltage peaks are higher here. But you
need not measure at the antenna, as you can calc' these bad voltages .

BTW antennas use Capacity hats to shape the pattern . You can also
add CAP' hats on the radials if they are 180 degrees as the RINGO
and other verticals do.


______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:46 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!news.PBI.net!mothra.westworld.com!alex-a5.ptw.com
From: Jay123a <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: importance of coax length for C.B.
Date: 27 Oct 96 14:29:39 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Internet Services
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mothra.westworld.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22 (Windows; I; 16bit)

(Copper Penny) wrote:
>Can someone out there please help. Is the length of the coax for a
>base or a mobile setup important for the C.B. band, will it affect the
>swr or not.
>Any comments or opinions would be welcome.
>Thanks in advance,
>
>Copper Penny.

Hello Copper Penny: As the other guys here have said, it don't matter
what the length is, just as long as the coax reachs the radio and
antenna. Important thing about coax in long lengths is to use low loss
coax such as RG8, RG213, or 9913 coax like this.

SWR, main consideration is properly assembling the antenna and
installation. Most CB antennas I've assembled the instructions were a bit
vauge but as the antenna was assembled you could understand them.

Hope this helps.

Jay  at  [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:47 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: importance of coax length for C.B.
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 12:11:53 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <552k8n$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 185.los-angeles-007.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Jim Hollenback wrote:
>
> Copper Penny () wrote:
> : Can someone out there please help. Is the length of the coax for a
> : base or a mobile setup important for the C.B. band, will it affect the
> : swr or not.
> : Any comments or opinions would be welcome.
> : Thanks in advance,
>
> : Copper Penny.
>
> Contrary to some of the other posts, the lenght of the coax on a C.B.
> band radio is extremely important. If the coax is to short the SWR
> will be extremely high and the power at the antenna will be extremely
> low, actually so low you won't be able to measure any power at all.
> You will also notice that the radio is very deaf when listening.  As
> you increase the length of the coax the SWR will suddenly drop and the
> radio will start to operate much better and other operators will be
> able to hear you. At this point any SWR less than 2:1 should be just fine.
> If your anal retentive, tunning the antenna to reduce the SWR to 1:1
> on your favorite channel will give you the warm fuzzies.
>
> Silver Dollar


altavoz: This is so untech that its not worth it !
Every post prior to this opposes your vu.

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:47 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news.sgi.com!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!news.dtc.hp.com!lf.hp.com!apollo.hp.com!news.waterloo.hp.com!hpax!jholly
From: [e-mail] (Jim Hollenback)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: importance of coax length for C.B.
Date: 28 Oct 1996 15:42:15 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard Cupertino Site
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <552k8n$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpwsmjh1.cup.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2.2]

Copper Penny () wrote:
: Can someone out there please help. Is the length of the coax for a
: base or a mobile setup important for the C.B. band, will it affect the
: swr or not.
: Any comments or opinions would be welcome.
: Thanks in advance,

: Copper Penny.

Contrary to some of the other posts, the lenght of the coax on a C.B.
band radio is extremely important. If the coax is to short the SWR
will be extremely high and the power at the antenna will be extremely
low, actually so low you won't be able to measure any power at all.
You will also notice that the radio is very deaf when listening.  As
you increase the length of the coax the SWR will suddenly drop and the
radio will start to operate much better and other operators will be
able to hear you. At this point any SWR less than 2:1 should be just fine.
If your anal retentive, tunning the antenna to reduce the SWR to 1:1
on your favorite channel will give you the warm fuzzies.

Silver Dollar



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:49 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!newspump.sol.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.uoregon.edu!news.efn.org!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Dick Hughes)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: importance of coax length for C.B.
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 01:08:53 GMT
Organization: Oregon Public Networking
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <552k8n$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dynip124.efn.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.299

On 28 Oct 1996 15:42:15 GMT, [e-mail] (Jim Hollenback) wrote:

>Copper Penny () wrote:
>: Can someone out there please help. Is the length of the coax for a
>: base or a mobile setup important for the C.B. band, will it affect the
>: swr or not.
>: Any comments or opinions would be welcome.
>: Thanks in advance,
>
>: Copper Penny.
>
>Contrary to some of the other posts, the lenght of the coax on a C.B.
>band radio is extremely important. If the coax is to short the SWR
>will be extremely high and the power at the antenna will be extremely
>low, actually so low you won't be able to measure any power at all.
>You will also notice that the radio is very deaf when listening.  As
>you increase the length of the coax the SWR will suddenly drop and the
>radio will start to operate much better and other operators will be
>able to hear you. At this point any SWR less than 2:1 should be just fine.
>If your anal retentive, tunning the antenna to reduce the SWR to 1:1
>on your favorite channel will give you the warm fuzzies.
>
>Silver Dollar
>

Here we go again.  SWR is determined by the LOAD.  Changing the length
of the coax will not do anything to the SWR of the LOAD.  You can get
your SWR meter to read all over the place by changing coax lengths,
but it does not change the SWR at the antenna.  It might make you feel
better, and it might make it easier to couple your transmitter to the
coax, but it doesn't change the SWR.

Dick Hughes - W6CCD




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:50 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!pacbell.com!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news.cerf.net!newsserver.sdsc.edu!usenet
From: Jim S <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: importance of coax length for C.B.
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 12:49:54 -0800
Organization: San Diego SuperComputer Center at UCSD
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pc0640.sd.gat.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win16; I)
To: my name <[e-mail]>

my name wrote:
:...snip...
:BTW, posting on a ham "thread" is ok but minimize the use of the term
:CB and don't use your CB handle.  You won't offend some of the Trolls.
:                                 Regards,
:                                  Mike K5WIM
:...

Who put you in charge of deciding who can and cannot post... and whether
one uses a handle or not... Infact, Ham postings dominate the CB
"thread".... and this kind of snivelling does nothing but add to the
animosity that was first created by Hams (yes, by Hams!) in about 1957
when the "11 meter ham band" was re-assigned to be a "Citizens Band". You
should also be informed that the whole idea of "handles" was first
created by disgruntled Hams (yes, by Hams!) who insisted on staying
operational on 11 meters... and therefore wanted to avoid detection. My
father-in-law was one of them. Not that that is anything to be proud
of... but it is the facts....... ......Jim Saeger


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:51 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-11.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: importance of coax length for C.B.
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 13:46:46 -0800
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.102.182
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

Jim S wrote:
> You
> should also be informed that the whole idea of "handles" was first
> created by disgruntled Hams (yes, by Hams!) who insisted on staying
> operational on 11 meters... and therefore wanted to avoid detection.

Hi Jim, we hams had handles long before the 11m CB band came into
existence. A lot of the CB lingo was adopted from ham radio just
as the 10-4 thing was adopted from the authorities. Pre-CB, "handle"
was just another word for "name" or "nickname" just like "XYL" is
another word for "wife". CBers then made a distinction between "name"
and "handle". You still hear us older hams say, "Handle here is Cecil".

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


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:53 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!mrwolf.demon.co.uk!Mandy
From: Mandy Wright <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: importance of coax length for C.B.
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 22:55:13 +0000
Organization: Radio Services
Lines: 29
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
 <552k8n$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mrwolf.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: mrwolf.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 3.00 <oJPoSssIZV2StO2Ral+KdVy6du>

In article <552k8n$[e-mail]>, Jim Hollenback
<[e-mail]> writes
>Copper Penny () wrote:
>: Can someone out there please help. Is the length of the coax for a
>: base or a mobile setup important for the C.B. band, will it affect the
>: swr or not.
>: Any comments or opinions would be welcome.
>: Thanks in advance,
>
>: Copper Penny.
>
>Contrary to some of the other posts, the lenght of the coax on a C.B.
>band radio is extremely important. If the coax is to short the SWR
>will be extremely high and the power at the antenna will be extremely
>low, actually so low you won't be able to measure any power at all.
>You will also notice that the radio is very deaf when listening.  As
>you increase the length of the coax the SWR will suddenly drop and the
>radio will start to operate much better and other operators will be
>able to hear you. At this point any SWR less than 2:1 should be just fine.
>If your anal retentive, tunning the antenna to reduce the SWR to 1:1
>on your favorite channel will give you the warm fuzzies.
>
>Silver Dollar
>
              *@*!    READ  KRAUS !
Mandy
(Replying on behalf of my husband, Tim (G1BCR / G9BZW), who hates computers
despite (or maybe because of) being a practising RF Engineer.)
Sussex  UK


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:54 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!lily.redrose.net!john
From: [e-mail] (James Pollock)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: 24 Oct 1996 09:17:30 GMT
Organization: Your Organization
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <54nc7a$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: l16.redrose.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.5
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30393 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41141 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20445 rec.radio.amateur.misc:116939

Hi.

   I have a friend who swears up and down that the length of the
coaxial cable to maintain resonance at a given frequency is important
for reducing the SWR.  He feels that it acts in a similar principal to
the fact that the elements of an antenna must be cut to the correct
length for the antenna to be resonant at a given frequency.

   It seems to me I have also read somewhere that this is a myth.  I
need the true scoop on this.  I'm preparing to put up a pretty good
antenna system on my roof (a homebrew 10 meter antenna cut to exactly
the middle of the band), and don't want to purchase an extra 6 ft of
Belden 9913 coax only to have it looped up and losing signal, when in
reality I could of used 20 feet instead of 26 feet of cable.

   Please carbon copy any responses to this post to [e-mail]
so I don't miss any good info.

                        Thanks

                            Jim



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:55 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.sandia.gov!tesuque.cs.sandia.gov!SantaFe!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jim Potter)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 16:21:37 GMT
Organization: The Santa Fe Institute
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial152.roadrunner.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.299
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30399 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41154 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20448 rec.radio.amateur.misc:116947

[e-mail] (James Pollock) wrote:

>Hi.
>
>   I have a friend who swears up and down that the length of the
>coaxial cable to maintain resonance at a given frequency is important
>for reducing the SWR.  He feels that it acts in a similar principal to
>the fact that the elements of an antenna must be cut to the correct
>length for the antenna to be resonant at a given frequency.
>
>   It seems to me I have also read somewhere that this is a myth.  I
>need the true scoop on this.  I'm preparing to put up a pretty good
>antenna system on my roof (a homebrew 10 meter antenna cut to exactly
>the middle of the band), and don't want to purchase an extra 6 ft of
>Belden 9913 coax only to have it looped up and losing signal, when in
>reality I could of used 20 feet instead of 26 feet of cable.
>
>   Please carbon copy any responses to this post to [e-mail]
>so I don't miss any good info.
>
>                       Thanks
>
>                            Jim
>
The length of coax doesn't change the VSWR, assuming it's all the same
impedance. However, the impedance at the transmitter output will be a
function of cable length if the VSWR is not 1:1.  Ultimately what
matters is not the VSWR, but the impedance match to the transmitter.
All that is required is a conjugate match so that the transmitter sees
a resistive load of the right resistance at the output device.

There is one way that the coax length affects VSWT. If the attenuation
is high the VSWR gets better with length. Someone once said a good low
power load for 144 MHz is 100 ft of RG-58. It doesn't matter too much
what's on the far end.

de K9GXC, Jim


James M. Potter, President              TEL: [phone]
JP Accelerator Works, Inc.              FAX: [phone]
2245 47th Street                        EMAIL: [e-mail]
Los Alamos, NM 87544-1604               URL: http://www.jpaw.com



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:57 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!metro.atlanta.com!news.radio.org!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 14:07:27 GMT
Lines: 99
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30401 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41155 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20449 rec.radio.amateur.misc:116949

In article <54nc7a$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (James Pollock) writ
es:
>   I have a friend who swears up and down that the length of the
>coaxial cable to maintain resonance at a given frequency is important
>for reducing the SWR.  He feels that it acts in a similar principal to
>the fact that the elements of an antenna must be cut to the correct
>length for the antenna to be resonant at a given frequency.
>
>   It seems to me I have also read somewhere that this is a myth.  I
>need the true scoop on this.  I'm preparing to put up a pretty good
>antenna system on my roof (a homebrew 10 meter antenna cut to exactly
>the middle of the band), and don't want to purchase an extra 6 ft of
>Belden 9913 coax only to have it looped up and losing signal, when in
>reality I could of used 20 feet instead of 26 feet of cable.

Ok, this can get complex because there are several interrelated
things happening here. Lets take them one at a time.

The only thing that determines SWR on a transmission line is
the ratio of the characteristic impedance of the line to the
impedance presented by *the load*. Nothing you can do at the
generator end can affect SWR, and changing the length of the
cable won't change SWR either (but see below).

However, changing the length of the line will change the impedance
presented to the generator. That's because a transmission line with
any SWR other than 1:1 acts as a transmission line transformer. By
changing the length of the line, you get an effect similar to, but
not quite the same as, changing the turns ratio of a transformer.
The SWR doesn't change, but the impedance presented to the generator
does. This can be useful, and is employed frequently for impedance
matching purposes. The most common such is the quarter wave matching
section.

In general, the impedance transformation will be complex, IE it will
be in the form of R+jX, where X can be capacitive or inductive depending
on cable length. The Smith Chart can be used to determine the transformation
effect by following the constant SWR circle around the chart for different
cable lengths (measured in wavelengths at the frequency of interest) and
reading out the R and X values. Note that the SWR is constant, but the
impedance presented to the generator changes with varying cable length.

Now something else can happen too, and this is where some of the
myths have arisen. If you feed a balanced antenna, such as a dipole,
with an unbalanced transmission line, such as coax, the *outside* of
the outer conductor of the transmission line can become part of one
arm of the dipole, and antenna currents can flow down the outside
of the transmission line.

Picture the dipole as a 1/4-wave section connected to the coax inner
and an L shaped element consisting of the other arm of the dipole and
the *outside* of the coax outer conductor. This can change the *load
impedance* presented to the transmission line because the antenna geometry
has been altered from a physically balanced dipole configuration, and
thus can change the SWR. Changing the coax length changes the effective
length of one leg of the dipole, and that changes the impedance presented
at the load end of the coax, and that changes SWR in the coax.

Coax transmission line currents flow on the outside of the inner
conductor and the inside of the outer conductor. This is because
of skin effect. The physics of coax forces the currents to be
equal in magnitude and opposite in direction. The opposite currents
cancel any radiation fields, and the coax doesn't radiate. But that
doesn't affect currents flowing on the outside of the outer conductor.
Those currents are independent of what's happening inside the coax.
Their radiation fields aren't canceled, and the coax becomes a radiating
part of the antenna.

Generally, it is undesirable to have antenna currents flowing on
the outside of the coax because it will alter the radiation pattern
of the antenna, alter its feedpoint impedance, and because it can
cause "hot shack" problems in some cases. The cure is to use a choke
balun at the antenna feedpoint to decouple the outside of the coax
from the antenna element to which the inside of the outer conductor
is connected.  (A choke balun can be simply a few turns of the coax
tightly coiled just before connection to the feedpoint. Or it can
consist of a number of ferrite beads slipped over the coax near
the feedpoint. Its purpose is to act as a high impedance to currents
trying to flow down the *outside* of the coax outer conductor.)

When you use such a balun, or if you are feeding an inherently
unbalanced antenna such as a groundplane mounted vertical, then
the coax doesn't become part of the antenna, so it can't change
the load impedance presented to the coax, and thus can't change
SWR. Any length coax can now be used without affecting SWR, or
antenna radiation pattern.

So you can see, there is some truth to the myth that coax length
can alter SWR, but it isn't quite the way many amateurs picture
it. The reason it can happen is because the coax has become an
unintended part of the antenna due to a failure to properly deal
with the unbalanced to balanced connection at the antenna feedpoint
with a balun.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:58 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.uoregon.edu!news.efn.org!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Dick Hughes)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 19:30:42 GMT
Organization: Oregon Public Networking
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dynip155.efn.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.299
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30417 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41170 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20457 rec.radio.amateur.misc:116975

On Thu, 24 Oct 1996 14:07:27 GMT, [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
wrote:

>In article <54nc7a$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (James Pollock) wri
tes:
>>   I have a friend who swears up and down that the length of the
>>coaxial cable to maintain resonance at a given frequency is important
>>for reducing the SWR.  He feels that it acts in a similar principal to
>>the fact that the elements of an antenna must be cut to the correct
>>length for the antenna to be resonant at a given frequency.
>>
>>   It seems to me I have also read somewhere that this is a myth.  I
>>need the true scoop on this.  I'm preparing to put up a pretty good
>>antenna system on my roof (a homebrew 10 meter antenna cut to exactly
>>the middle of the band), and don't want to purchase an extra 6 ft of
>>Belden 9913 coax only to have it looped up and losing signal, when in
>>reality I could of used 20 feet instead of 26 feet of cable.
>
>Ok, this can get complex because there are several interrelated
>things happening here. Lets take them one at a time.
>
>The only thing that determines SWR on a transmission line is
>the ratio of the characteristic impedance of the line to the
>impedance presented by *the load*. Nothing you can do at the
>generator end can affect SWR, and changing the length of the
>cable won't change SWR either (but see below).

<huge snip>

>Gary

In general, the correct length of coax for an HF antenna is the
distance it takes to get from the transmitter to the antenna.  Don't
worry about length.

Dick Hughes - W6CCD



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:19:59 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!scnews.sc.intel.com!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 10:30:18 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.102.182
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30418 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41172 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20459 rec.radio.amateur.misc:116978

Steve Bramham wrote:
> I know what works and it works in 99% of the cases involved.....

Hey Steve, be fair - tell us about that other 1%.

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


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:01 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.sandia.gov!tesuque.cs.sandia.gov!corvette.mst6.lanl.gov!newshost.lanl.gov!usenet
From: Jim Devenport <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 11:34:01 -0600
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jdport.lanl.gov
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]
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30422 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20464

James Pollock wrote:
<snippety>
>    It seems to me I have also read somewhere that this is a myth.  I
> need the true scoop on this.  I'm preparing to put up a pretty good
> antenna system on my roof (a homebrew 10 meter antenna cut to exactly
> the middle of the band), and don't want to purchase an extra 6 ft of
> Belden 9913 coax only to have it looped up and losing signal, when in
> reality I could of used 20 feet instead of 26 feet of cable.
> <again snippety>

Jim, in addition to the responses you've already received I want to add
the certainty that even with RG-58 the "26 feet of cable" would result
in essentially NO extra noticeable loss than "20 feet of cable".  And
with Belden 9913 the additional loss would be even more miniscule.
According to my charts, the losses of these cables are: (per 100 feet @
30 MHZ)
RG-58            2.5 dB
Belden 9913      0.75 dB (!)
RG-8             1.0 dB

So, even if you were using the dreaded RG58 the loss would be less than
a fraction of a dB for the additional 6 feet or so of coax.  Even with a
high SWR (where the reflections cause more than one trip "up and down
the coax" and thus increase the effective loss) 26 feet is not a big
deal at all.  3 dB is generally regarded as a barely discernable
difference on the receiving end without accurate test equipment to
"help" notice the difference.
As your previous respondees have noted, if the SWR is high you CAN
"fool" the transmitter into "seeing" a lower SWR by messing with coax
length but far more will be gained by trying to lower the SWR up at the
antenna FEEDPOINT which will not only make your transmitter happier but
increase apparent antenna effectiveness too, both transmit and receive.
"SWR" is SO overhyped as important anyway.  I fondly recall in the '70's
working all kinds of DX on 10 meters with a homebrew 2 (TWO!) meter J
pole since I was a poor college student and didn't have the nerve to
sneak HF wires onto the roof of my college housing.....
I suppose it worked so well because I didn't own an SWR meter, just
heard the band was open and tried the J pole since that was all I had on
the roof and had a blast with it, who knows what the SWR was, but I'd
have had to QRT had I had a meter to scare myself with.....
--
|-------------------------------------------------------|
|Jim Devenport WB5AOX                                   |
|All Standard Disclaimers Disclaimed                    |
|My views rarely (if ever) reflect those of my employers|
|http://nis-www.lanl.gov/~jdport/                       |
|-------------------------------------------------------|


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:02 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.sandia.gov!tesuque.cs.sandia.gov!SantaFe!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jim Potter)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 01:41:26 GMT
Organization: The Santa Fe Institute
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial156.roadrunner.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.299
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30424 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41176 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20466 rec.radio.amateur.misc:116985

[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) wrote:

>So you can see, there is some truth to the myth that coax length
>can alter SWR, but it isn't quite the way many amateurs picture
>it. The reason it can happen is because the coax has become an
>unintended part of the antenna due to a failure to properly deal
>with the unbalanced to balanced connection at the antenna feedpoint
>with a balun.
>
>Gary


Good point, Gary. I hadn't thought of that, but it makes a lot of
sense. Most of the systems I deal with have a resonant cavity load fed
with rigid coax where there is no chance of any rf currents on the
outside. (A good thing too, at 250 kW peak and 425 MHz.)

de K9GXC, Jim


James M. Potter, President              TEL: [phone]
JP Accelerator Works, Inc.              FAX: [phone]
2245 47th Street                        EMAIL: [e-mail]
Los Alamos, NM 87544-1604               URL: http://www.jpaw.com



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:03 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!news-feed.inet.tele.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,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 09:12:54 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup108-7-8.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 3.0Gold (Win16; I)
To: Dick Hughes <[e-mail]>
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30425 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41182 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20469 rec.radio.amateur.misc:116987

> In general, the correct length of coax for an HF antenna is the
> distance it takes to get from the transmitter to the antenna.  Don't
> worry about length.
>
> Dick Hughes - W6CCD

That is a damn good answer and works in 99.99%, the rest is fiction.

42 years of hamming SM0BKZ


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:04 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!news-m01.ny.us.ibm.net!news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: 25 Oct 1996 22:55:59 GMT
Lines: 65
Message-ID: <54rghv$1efg$[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]@smtp-gw01.ny.us.ibm.net
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip129-37-205-90.in.us.ibm.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 2.0
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30447 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41199 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20476 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117004

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jim Potter) writes:
>[e-mail] (James Pollock) wrote:
>
>>Hi.
>>
>>   I have a friend who swears up and down that the length of the
>>coaxial cable to maintain resonance at a given frequency is important
>>for reducing the SWR.  He feels that it acts in a similar principal to
>>the fact that the elements of an antenna must be cut to the correct
>>length for the antenna to be resonant at a given frequency.
>>
>>   It seems to me I have also read somewhere that this is a myth.  I
>>need the true scoop on this.  I'm preparing to put up a pretty good
>>antenna system on my roof (a homebrew 10 meter antenna cut to exactly
>>the middle of the band), and don't want to purchase an extra 6 ft of
>>Belden 9913 coax only to have it looped up and losing signal, when in
>>reality I could of used 20 feet instead of 26 feet of cable.
>>
>>   Please carbon copy any responses to this post to [e-mail]
>>so I don't miss any good info.
>>
>>                      Thanks
>>
>>                            Jim
>>
>The length of coax doesn't change the VSWR, assuming it's all the same
>impedance. However, the impedance at the transmitter output will be a
>function of cable length if the VSWR is not 1:1.  Ultimately what
>matters is not the VSWR, but the impedance match to the transmitter.
>All that is required is a conjugate match so that the transmitter sees
>a resistive load of the right resistance at the output device.
>
>There is one way that the coax length affects VSWT. If the attenuation
>is high the VSWR gets better with length. Someone once said a good low
>power load for 144 MHz is 100 ft of RG-58. It doesn't matter too much
>what's on the far end.
>
>de K9GXC, Jim
>
>
>James M. Potter, President             TEL: [phone]
>JP Accelerator Works, Inc.             FAX: [phone]
>2245 47th Street                               EMAIL: [e-mail]
>Los Alamos, NM 87544-1604              URL: http://www.jpaw.com
>


 Well,
 Let's if I can do this reply. Yes, It's a myth! The only thing that's changin
g is the
 APPARENT XL-XC that the METER is seeing. We all know that the Electrical
 wavelength recurrs at a different distance than the phusical wavelength. The
old
 velocity factor trick affects that (cheaper coax = lower VF). So, the loss is

 cumulative to the length, the SWR associated with the coax = myth.

 If you want to play with the numbers of length, coax type, swr, ant gain, and
 effective power. Download TEEREV.ZIP from the ARRL BBS, or it's on the latest
 level of the QRZ CD-ROM.

                                                          Jim WD9AHF

 P.S. I agree with the guy who said the correct length is what reaches! Just m
ake
 sure that you look at what it costs. I wrote that TEEREV program to see what
 the tradeoff was between good coax vs an amplifier. You will be surprised at
 what the cost of 'cheap' coax is.



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:05 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 17:07:04 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.102.182
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30448 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41200 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20479 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117005

Joel Gamble wrote:
>    The ONLY time coax length makes a difference is when it is radiating
> rf,thus it becomes an active part of the antenna,instead of the passive
> conduit it is designed to be.

Hi Joel, got to nitpick a tad.

1. 100ft of RG-58 on 440MHz with an SWR of 1:1 and *no feedline radiation*
does make a difference.

2. 100ft of RG-58 on 28MHz with an SWR of 20:1 and *no feedline radiation*
does make a difference.

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


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:06 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.asu.edu!aztec.asu.edu!hamop
From: [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: 26 Oct 1996 05:40:10 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <54s87q$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aztec.asu.edu


        There is a common situation in which an SWR meter indicates
differing SWR with length.  This occurs when currents on the outside
of the coax which will differ wtih length are getting into the meter
and mixing with the normal coax currents to produce an erroneous
SWR reading that then appears to vary with length.
Charlie, W7XC
--


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:07 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!mr.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!hammer.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!disco.iinet.net.au!opera.iinet.net.au!news
From: [e-mail] (Richard Hosking)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 22:58:59 GMT
Organization: iiNet Technologies Pty Ltd
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <54rg26$[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: grunge216.nv.iinet.net.au
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30466 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41211 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20490 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117021

[e-mail] (James Pollock) wrote:

>Hi.

>   I have a friend who swears up and down that the length of the
>coaxial cable to maintain resonance at a given frequency is important
>for reducing the SWR.  He feels that it acts in a similar principal to
>the fact that the elements of an antenna must be cut to the correct
>length for the antenna to be resonant at a given frequency.

>   It seems to me I have also read somewhere that this is a myth.  I
>need the true scoop on this.  I'm preparing to put up a pretty good
>antenna system on my roof (a homebrew 10 meter antenna cut to exactly
>the middle of the band), and don't want to purchase an extra 6 ft of
>Belden 9913 coax only to have it looped up and losing signal, when in
>reality I could of used 20 feet instead of 26 feet of cable.

Jim
If the coax is matched (ie the load presents a resistive, 50 Ohm
impedance) then the length of the coax is unimportant, except that it
has loss depending on how good it is and the operating frequency. If
the load is not matched properly then there will be different
impedances at different  points aliong the coax and you will get a
different SWR with a 50 ohm source, depending on where you feed the
coax. So your friend is correct if the load is not m,atched
accurately.

Richard Hosking

VK6BRO
[e-mail]
http://www.iinet.net.au/~richardh



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:09 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.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: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: 26 Oct 1996 10:35:10 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 30
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54t7iu$[e-mail]>
References: <54rg26$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <54rg26$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Richard
Hosking) writes:

>If
>the load is not matched properly then there will be different
>impedances at different  points aliong the coax and you will get a
>different SWR with a 50 ohm source, depending on where you feed the
>coax. So your friend is correct if the load is not m,atched
>accurately.
>
>

There will indeed be different impedances, BUT the SWR will remain the
same.

Any change is caused by:

1.) Common mode currents that affect antenna tuning. This indicates the
system needs a choke or current balun.

2.) The line impedance being different than the SWR meter impedance. This
indicates a cheap line or poorly dedsigned or adjusted meter.

3.) Line attenuation (this only makes SWR get better as the line is
longer). This indicates a poor line at the operating frequency.

If the system is good, even if the SWR is high, there is absolutely NO
detectable change in SWR with line length.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:10 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!newsfeed.concentric.net!news2.acs.oakland.edu!jobone!lynx.unm.edu!SantaFe!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jim Potter)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 03:48:21 GMT
Organization: The Santa Fe Institute
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54oqud$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial136.roadrunner.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.299
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30470 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41213 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20495 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117027

[e-mail] (Roy Lewallen) wrote:


>There's one more way that cable length can affect VSWR. If common-mode
>current is present (that is, current is flowing on the outside of coax, or
>the currents in twinlead aren't equal and opposite), the feedline becomes
>part of the antenna. In that situation, changing the length of the feedline
>changes the antenna itself, which will affect VSWR.
>
>VSWR can seem to change with cable length if the characteristic impedance
>of the VSWR meter isn't the same as that of the cable. I've measured RG-58
>at over 60 ohms Z0, and a couple of cheap SWR meters I've looked at were
>off also, so I imagine this is a fairly common occurrence. In this case,
>the SWR doesn't really change with feedline length, but the SWR meter says
>it does.
>
>Roy Lewallen, W7EL

I agree with your comment on common mode currents. Also, with your
comment about the directional coupler. What it really amounts to is
that if the coupler has poor directivity (equivalent to not being
balanced for the impedance of the cable being used), some of the
forward wave is coupled into the reflected port. The resultant
apparent reflected signal depends on the relative phases of the
forward and reflected power and thus on the position of the coupler in
the standing wave. This phenomenon can also make the VSWR look better
than it really is if the two waves tend to cancel.

This discussion is a good example of the Internet at work. It's nice
to see that the ham radio newsgroup generally seems to be populated by
considerate people and not the nutcakes that wase bandwidth on a
couple of other newsgroups I follow.

73 de K9GXC, Jim


James M. Potter, President              TEL: [phone]
JP Accelerator Works, Inc.              FAX: [phone]
2245 47th Street                        EMAIL: [e-mail]
Los Alamos, NM 87544-1604               URL: http://www.jpaw.com



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:11 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!southwind.net!news-out.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!newsie.dmc.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Tom Sefranek)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 15:34:46 GMT
Organization: cmcorp.com
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <54tbgg$[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: tcs.cmcorp.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30471 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41214 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20496 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117028

Cecil Moore <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Joel Gamble wrote:
>>    The ONLY time coax length makes a difference is when it is radiating
>> rf,thus it becomes an active part of the antenna,instead of the passive
>> conduit it is designed to be.

>Hi Joel, got to nitpick a tad.

>1. 100ft of RG-58 on 440MHz with an SWR of 1:1 and *no feedline radiation*
>does make a difference.

Your right, I'd much rather have 75 ohm 1" hardline WITH VSWR than 50
ohm RG-58 at 450 Mhz.

>2. 100ft of RG-58 on 28MHz with an SWR of 20:1 and *no feedline radiation*
>does make a difference.

Again I'd rather have 75 ohm cable TV hardline .5" than RG-58.
Cecil is right, the general rule is get what you can for the lowest
loss.  Hgh VSWR adds a LOT of loss to an already losssy cable.

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

Tom
WA1RHP
Net Elmer
I am my own employer!




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:12 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!newsfeed.concentric.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!mathserv.mps.ohio-state.edu!news.physics.uiowa.edu!news.uiowa.edu!news
From: "William E. Sabin" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 06:53:14 -0700
Organization: none
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54s87q$[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)

CHARLES J. MICHAELS wrote:
>
>         There is a common situation in which an SWR meter indicates
> differing SWR with length.  This occurs when currents on the outside
> of the coax which will differ wtih length are getting into the meter
> and mixing with the normal coax currents to produce an erroneous
> SWR reading that then appears to vary with length.


If the SWR meter is suitably shielded the outside currents will bypass
the SWR-measuring circuitry. A good SWR meter should be well shielded for
this reason.

Bill W0IYH


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:13 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!metro.atlanta.com!news.radio.org!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <54rg26$[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 20:02:50 GMT
Lines: 74
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30493 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41236 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20505 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117045

In article <54rg26$[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>Jim
>If the coax is matched (ie the load presents a resistive, 50 Ohm
>impedance) then the length of the coax is unimportant, except that it
>has loss depending on how good it is and the operating frequency. If
>the load is not matched properly then there will be different
>impedances at different  points aliong the coax and you will get a
>different SWR with a 50 ohm source, depending on where you feed the
>coax. So your friend is correct if the load is not m,atched
>accurately.

No, the SWR is constant, and is a function of the mismatch at the
load end only. That constant SWR is what causes the presented
impedance variation along the line (due to transmission line
transformer action). If you insert the SWR meter anywhere along
the line, it will read the same SWR (discounting line loss). A
SWR meter reads SWR, not impedance.

Internally, a SWR meter is a 50 ohm line section, so it merely
acts as a short extension to the cable being measured. (If you
try to measure 75 ohm line with a 50 ohm SWR meter, however,
you'll be in for some surprises.)

Conversely, if you have an operating impedance bridge, you can
measure the impedance at any point along the line, and given
that, the cable length from the load to that point, and a Smith
Chart, you can determine the SWR on the line (discounting line
loss).

Now if the line has loss, and all real lines do, then you have
to add a fourth variable, and the system becomes more complex.
Instead of a constant SWR circle on the Smith Chart, now you have
to follow a SWR spiral which approaches 1:1 as cable length tends
toward infinity. The approach is asymptotic, and if cable loss is
high, will quickly approach 1:1, but never quite reaches 1:1. If
loss is low, the approach will be very gradual, and for moderate
line lengths can be assumed to be a constant SWR circle.

(Incidently, this is a convienent way to measure line loss,
just place a short or open at the load end of the cable and
read the SWR at the source end, the closer to 1:1 it is, the
higher the cable loss. There's a formula in the Handbook which
will give you the exact loss in db for a given SWR and line
length.)

For moderate lengths of good cable at HF (good cable, not RG-58),
cable loss can be discounted and the SWR circle can be assumed
nearly constant. At VHF+ however, even with good cables loss may
become significant when the length exceeds several wavelengths
and must be considered when analyzing line behavior.

This means that a low SWR is not necessarily a good thing. It
can indicate a lossy system rather than indicating a good match.
One way to differentiate is to look at the SWR curve over a band
of frequencies. If it is broad and flat, the cable is probably
lossy (or you have a dummy load for a termination). Real antennas
are typically only close to design impedance over a narrow frequency
range (typically less than 5% around the design frequency), so the
SWR curve should quickly rise as it moves away from the center
frequency of that range. Anyone who says he has a broad flat SWR
is probably really telling you he has a pretty good dummy load
for an antenna system.

(Note there are exceptions, antennas such as discones and log
periodics present a near constant impedance over a large frequency
excursion. But in general a low antenna system Q is indicative of
low efficiency and high loss, IE the behavior of a dummy load.)

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:14 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [e-mail](Anthony Severdia)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: 26 Oct 1996 20:20:15 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <54trpv$[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54oqud$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sfo-ca26-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat Oct 26  1:20:15 PM PDT 1996

In <[e-mail]> Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
writes:
>
>Jim Potter <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>>to see that the ham radio newsgroup generally seems to be populated
by
>>considerate people and not the nutcakes that wase bandwidth on a
>>couple of other newsgroups I follow.
>
>Hi Jim, just don't ask "Where does reflected power go?"
>That one turned almost everyone (including me) into a
>nutcake.
>
>73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC

Cecil:

    And the answer is ......(?)   :)

    -=Tony=-    W6ANV


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:15 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 96 14:51:50 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54oqud$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1d.delphi.com
X-To: Jim Potter <[e-mail]>

Jim Potter <[e-mail]> writes:

>to see that the ham radio newsgroup generally seems to be populated by
>considerate people and not the nutcakes that wase bandwidth on a
>couple of other newsgroups I follow.

Hi Jim, just don't ask "Where does reflected power go?"
That one turned almost everyone (including me) into a
nutcake.

73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:16 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!nntp.primenet.com!news.asu.edu!aztec.asu.edu!hamop
From: [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: 26 Oct 1996 20:36:08 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <54tsno$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aztec.asu.edu


Richard Hoskings said -
If the coax is matched (ie the load presents a resistive, 50 Ohm
impedance) then the length of the coax is unimportant, except that it
has loss depending on how good it is and the operating frequency. If
the load is not matched properly then there will be different
impedances at different  points aliong the coax and you will get a
different SWR with a 50 ohm source, depending on where you feed the
coax. So your friend is correct if the load is not m,atched
accurately.

Richard Hosking


Richard,
        Nonsense.

Charlie, W7XC
--


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:17 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: Merv Stump <[e-mail]@postoffice.worldnet.att.net>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: 26 Oct 1996 22:42:30 GMT
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <54u44m$[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54tbgg$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 72.new-york-011.ny.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)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30506 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41255 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20511 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117049

ARRL currently has a program under development which analyzes transmission
line.  I'm fortunate to have been asked to play with an early copy.
Running some quick examples shows the following:

At 28 MHz an antenna with a purely resistive load of 50 ohms fed with 100
feet of RG213 has a loss of 1.181 dB.  There is no additional loss due to
SWR.

The same antenna fed with 100 feed of 1/2 inch 75 ohm hard line has a loss
of .420 dB due to the cable and an additional .032 dB due to the SWR for a
total loss of .452 dB.

An antenna with a purely resistive load of 500 ohms (10/1 SWR) fed with
RG213 has a loss of 1.181 due to the cable and an additional 2.702 dB due
to the SWR for a total loss of 3.883 dB.

The same antenna fed with 1/2 inch  75 ohm hard line has a loss of .420 DB
due to the cable and an additional .032 dB due to SWR for a total loss of
452 dB.

Incidentally, I chose purely resistive loads just to simplify things.  The
program works with complex loads as well.  If anyone would like a specific
calculation you can eMail me.  All that is needed is the type cable, the
length of the cable, the frequency and the load, (resistive and
inductive).

Regards, Merv



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:18 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news.efn.org!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Dick Hughes)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 23:24:32 GMT
Organization: Oregon Public Networking
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54tsno$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dynip131.efn.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.299

On 26 Oct 1996 20:36:08 GMT, [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
wrote:

>
>Richard Hoskings said -
>If the coax is matched (ie the load presents a resistive, 50 Ohm
>impedance) then the length of the coax is unimportant, except that it
>has loss depending on how good it is and the operating frequency. If
>the load is not matched properly then there will be different
>impedances at different  points aliong the coax and you will get a
>different SWR with a 50 ohm source, depending on where you feed the
>coax. So your friend is correct if the load is not m,atched
>accurately.
>
>Richard Hosking
>
>
>Richard,
>       Nonsense.
>
>Charlie, W7XC
>--

Right on Charlie.  The SWR is determined by the load!  It does not
change just because you change the length of the feed line.  Not sure
if we will ever get this across.

Dick Hughes - W6CCD



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:19 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 21:02:32 -0700
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30516 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20514

Jim Devenport wrote:
>
> James Pollock wrote:
> <snippety>
> >    It seems to me I have also read somewhere that this is a myth.  I
> > need the true scoop on this.  I'm preparing to put up a pretty good
> > antenna system on my roof (a homebrew 10 meter antenna cut to exactly
> > the middle of the band), and don't want to purchase an extra 6 ft of
> > Belden 9913 coax only to have it looped up and losing signal, when in
> > reality I could of used 20 feet instead of 26 feet of cable.
> > <again snippety>
>
> Jim, in addition to the responses you've already received I want to add
> the certainty that even with RG-58 the "26 feet of cable" would result
> in essentially NO extra noticeable loss than "20 feet of cable".  And
> with Belden 9913 the additional loss would be even more miniscule.
> According to my charts, the losses of these cables are: (per 100 feet @
> 30 MHZ)
> RG-58            2.5 dB
> Belden 9913      0.75 dB (!)
> RG-8             1.0 dB
>
> So, even if you were using the dreaded RG58 the loss would be less than
> a fraction of a dB for the additional 6 feet or so of coax.  Even with a
> high SWR (where the reflections cause more than one trip "up and down
> the coax" and thus increase the effective loss) 26 feet is not a big
> deal at all.  3 dB is generally regarded as a barely discernable
> difference on the receiving end without accurate test equipment to
> "help" notice the difference.
> As your previous respondees have noted, if the SWR is high you CAN
> "fool" the transmitter into "seeing" a lower SWR by messing with coax
> length

altavoz: No, you cant fool the transmitter, the SWR will not change
on changing coax length.


but far more will be gained by trying to lower the SWR up at the
> antenna FEEDPOINT which will not only make your transmitter happier but
> increase apparent antenna effectiveness too, both transmit and receive.
> "SWR" is SO overhyped as important anyway.  I fondly recall in the '70's
> working all kinds of DX on 10 meters with a homebrew 2 (TWO!) meter J
> pole since I was a poor college student and didn't have the nerve to
> sneak HF wires onto the roof of my college housing.....
> I suppose it worked so well because I didn't own an SWR meter, just
> heard the band was open and tried the J pole since that was all I had on
> the roof and had a blast with it, who knows what the SWR was, but I'd
> have had to QRT had I had a meter to scare myself with.....Jim Devenport WB5
AOX


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:21 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 21:18:48 -0700
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <54nud1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

K1BQT wrote:
>
> Hi Jim--
>
> In your inquiery, you wrote:
>
>  I'm preparing to put up a pretty good
> antenna system on my roof (a homebrew 10 meter antenna cut to exactly
> the middle of the band), and don't want to purchase an extra 6 ft of
> Belden 9913 coax only to have it looped up and losing signal, when in
> reality I could of used 20 feet instead of 26 feet of cable.
>
> In response:
>
> As long as the antenna's feedpoint impedance somewhat matches the
> impedance of the line, it doesn't really matter how long your cable is. It
> is true that--as the antenna impedance changes (which it
> will--constantly--across the band), the coax may take on the properties of
> an impedance transformer.  That is, it may take a 40-Ohm load presented by
> the antenna and make it look like 60 Ohms at the transmitter--or whatever.
>  As a practical matter, this isn't a problem to lose sleep over unless the
> mis-match becomes extremely large.
>
> You could cut your feedline to a multiple of an electrical
> half-wavelength.  This will ensure that the transmitter sees exactly the
> SAME impedance that is occuring at the antenna feedpoint.  But, once
> again, what's the point?  The antenna is going to change impedance anyway
> across its range--and your transmitter can cope. Normally, the only time
> someone would use a multiple of a half-wavelength of feedline is when they
> want to measure the feedpoint characteristics of the antenna from the
> ground for documentation purposes.
>
> By the same token, you'll be wasting money to use 9913 at 30 MHz over a
> 20-foot run.  Go down to Radio Shack and get some RG8 mini.  The
> difference in loss will be barely measurable (measured in hundredths of a
> dB) and meaningless.
>
> My advice would be--don't sweat the small stuff.  Instead, pay attention
> to the things that will really matter--like radiation pattern on the
> horizon, radiator efficiency, gain, and separation from lossy or
> interfering media (ie other antennas--or roof flashing, aluminum-backed
> insulation, and house wiring).
>
> Good luck with it!
>
> Rick  K1BQT


altavoz: well said, N6PL Paul H. Lee had a book on verticals
that shows how to "wrap" a 2:1 SWR at 80 meters to cover
the whole band . It will work at any frequency . Passive
components only .

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:24 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 20:24:58 -0700
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)
To: James Pollock <[e-mail]>
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30521 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41266 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20517 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117062

James Pollock wrote:
>
> Hi.
>
>    I have a friend who swears up and down that the length of the
> coaxial cable to maintain resonance at a given frequency is important
> for reducing the SWR.  He feels that it acts in a similar principal to
> the fact that the elements of an antenna must be cut to the correct
> length for the antenna to be resonant at a given frequency.
>
>    It seems to me I have also read somewhere that this is a myth.  I
> need the true scoop on this.  I'm preparing to put up a pretty good
> antenna system on my roof (a homebrew 10 meter antenna cut to exactly
> the middle of the band), and don't want to purchase an extra 6 ft of
> Belden 9913 coax only to have it looped up and losing signal, when in
> reality I could of used 20 feet instead of 26 feet of cable.    Jim

altavoz: 9913 !!! on 30 MHZ  NOT !! RG8FOAM
You'll see a .7 db/100'  to .9db/100' increase in attenuation
going to RG8foam . WOW , BIG LOSS ( NOT)
  Stick to radiation pattern adjustments , not splitting hairs
over coax.
  Read "amatuer radio vert' antenna handbook" By CAPT Paul H.Lee
deceased (N6PL) . Its the greatest.




______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:25 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 20:47:30 -0700
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30522 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41267 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20518 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117064

Dave Hockaday wrote:
>
> James Pollock wrote:
> >    I have a friend who swears up and down that the length of the
> > coaxial cable to maintain resonance at a given frequency is important
> > for reducing the SWR.  He feels that it acts in a similar principal to
> > the fact that the elements of an antenna must be cut to the correct
> > length for the antenna to be resonant at a given frequency.
>
> Hi Jim. This is true if the feedline impedance is different than that of
> the antenna/transmitter. If you use 50 ohm feedline with a 50 ohm
> antenna/transmitter, any length is acceptable. If you substituted say, 75
> ohm feedline, you would need to cut the feedline in 1/2 wl multiples (the
> impedance is repeated every 1/2 wl).
>
> Dave Hockaday WB4IUY

altavoz: You dont need to cut in 1/2 wave multiples
since it wont change the SWR except thru a very small
increase due to decreasing attenuation over length.
H.F. has very low attenuation on RG8


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:26 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news-m01.ny.us.ibm.net!news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: 27 Oct 1996 04:01:20 GMT
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <54umqg$a58$[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]@smtp-gw01.ny.us.ibm.net
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip129-37-205-74.in.us.ibm.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 2.0
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30524 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41270 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20520 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117066

In <[e-mail]>, Cecil Moore <[e-mail].c
om> writes:
>Joel Gamble wrote:
>>    The ONLY time coax length makes a difference is when it is radiating
>> rf,thus it becomes an active part of the antenna,instead of the passive
>> conduit it is designed to be.
>
>Hi Joel, got to nitpick a tad.
>
>1. 100ft of RG-58 on 440MHz with an SWR of 1:1 and *no feedline radiation*
>does make a difference.
>
>2. 100ft of RG-58 on 28MHz with an SWR of 20:1 and *no feedline radiation*
>does make a difference.
>
>73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)

 Cecil,

  Have they just recently started calling 440 Mhz HF?  :-)))  <- beard

                                                         Jim WD9AHF


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:27 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 21:13:23 -0700
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30525 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41272 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20521 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117067

> It's possible to use a cable with an impedance not
> equal to the characteristic impedance of your
> antenna and rig. For example, a half wave length
> of 75 ohm cable will work between a 50 ohm antenna
> and a 50 ohm transmitter.  You can also use 75 ohm
> cable to match a 100 ohm antenna to a 50 ohm rig
> by cutting it to the right length.  Unfortunately,
> these tricks generally only work at one frequency.
>
> In this case, the length of the cable is critical
> to a given frequency.
>
> Steve KT4FY

altavoz: No, a 50 ohm ant' feeding a 75ohm coax will
cause a SWR into coax and towards the radio and an exact
length of coax will not reduce the SWR except as
attenuation factor over that length.


______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:28 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!feed1.news.erols.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: Merv Stump <[e-mail]@postoffice.worldnet.att.net>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: 27 Oct 1996 10:28:11 GMT
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <54vdfr$[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54tbgg$[e-mail]> <54u44m$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 85.new-york-011.ny.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)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30539 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41281 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20527 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117077

Merv Stump <[e-mail]@postoffice.worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>ARRL currently has a program under development which analyzes transmission
>line.  I'm fortunate to have been asked to play with an early copy.
>Running some quick examples shows the following:
>
>At 28 MHz an antenna with a purely resistive load of 50 ohms fed with 100
>feet of RG213 has a loss of 1.181 dB.  There is no additional loss due to
>SWR.
>
>The same antenna fed with 100 feed of 1/2 inch 75 ohm hard line has a loss
>of .420 dB due to the cable and an additional .032 dB due to the SWR for a
>total loss of .452 dB.
>
>An antenna with a purely resistive load of 500 ohms (10/1 SWR) fed with
>RG213 has a loss of 1.181 due to the cable and an additional 2.702 dB due
>to the SWR for a total loss of 3.883 dB.
>
>The same antenna fed with 1/2 inch  75 ohm hard line has a loss of .420 DB
>due to the cable and an additional .032 dB due to SWR for a total loss of
>452 dB.
>
>Incidentally, I chose purely resistive loads just to simplify things.  The
>program works with complex loads as well.  If anyone would like a specific
>calculation you can eMail me.  All that is needed is the type cable, the
>length of the cable, the frequency and the load, (resistive and
>inductive).
>
>Regards, Merv
>
I've had a couple of requests for examples directly addressing the length
of coax question:

At 28 MHz an antenna with an impedance of 70R +4J fed with 11.597 feet of
RG213(1/2 wave length at 28 MHz) has an impedance at the input of 69.28R
+3.76J.  Virtually identical to the load, but even a halfwave of cable
does have some transforming characteristics due to it's loses.  TLA
computes the SWR at load as 1.41/1 and at the input as 1.40/1.

The same antenna fed with 5.798 feet of RG213 (1/4 wave length at 28MHz)
has an impedance at the load of 35.77R -2.35J.  An obvious transformation
of the impedance, however, the SWR is still 1.41/1.

If you feed the antenna with 1/2 wave of PERFECT COAX,(NO LOSSES) TLA
computes the impedance at input as 70.02R + 3.79J (The difference between
this and 70R and 4J can be attributed to rounding.)

Regards, Merv



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:30 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 14:31:17 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30554 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41301 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20532 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117091

Cecil Moore wrote:
>
> Joel Gamble wrote:
> >    The ONLY time coax length makes a difference is when it is radiating
> > rf,thus it becomes an active part of the antenna,instead of the passive
> > conduit it is designed to be.
>
> Hi Joel, got to nitpick a tad.
>
> 1. 100ft of RG-58 on 440MHz with an SWR of 1:1 and *no feedline radiation*
> does make a difference.

altavoz: I get 271 "1/4 wavelengths" and that makes it an ODD multiple
of 1/4w and therefore it will radiate cause the open end of the coax
will see a short on the outside end of the coax at the radio end.
.66 VF RG58 , assuming a high SWR at load and 1:1 at radio.

> 2. 100ft of RG-58 on 28MHz with an SWR of 20:1 and *no feedline radiation*
> does make a difference.

altavoz: The diff we're talking of is trimming the line and in your
case trimming the line will increase the RF ( feedline radiation)
on the outside of the coax By pulling down the Z seen on the outside
by the antenna . Trimming 1/4w will peak the FEEDLINE RADIATION.



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

--

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:31 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 96 11:58:31 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54umqg$a58$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1d.delphi.com
X-To: <[e-mail]>

<[e-mail]> writes:

>>>    The ONLY time coax length makes a difference is when it is radiating


>  Have they just recently started calling 440 Mhz HF?  :-)))  <- beard

Well, guess that's another nit to pick. Joel forgot to say "HF"
in his statement above.

73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:32 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.asu.edu!aztec.asu.edu!hamop
From: [e-mail] (CHARLES J. MICHAELS)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: 27 Oct 1996 21:45:33 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <550l5t$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aztec.asu.edu


Re this discussion about SWR and feeder length:
        While it is indeed true that SWR is fairly constant with
feeder length except for a decrease with length due to attenuation,
the impedance seen at the line input differs wtih each length and
some impedances may be more acceptable to the transmitter output
circuits than others.  This is particularly true of pi output
circuits found in most tube amplifiers.

Charlie, W7XC
--


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:33 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.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] (K1BQT)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: 27 Oct 1996 12:09:52 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 20
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <550510$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (K1BQT)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

altavoz: well said, N6PL Paul H. Lee had a book on verticals
that shows how to "wrap" a 2:1 SWR at 80 meters to cover
the whole band . It will work at any frequency . Passive
components only .

You can do this--but with significant reduction in efficiency as you move
away from Fr (see Frank Witt's work with 80-meter dipoles in the ARRL
Antenna Handbook for more on this).  The point I wanted to make is that
impedance may change with line length, but true VSWR will not (save for
the influence of line loss).  That is to say, 25 Ohms may be transformed
to 100 Ohms--or to any complex impedance on the Smith Chart in between--by
the line, but the VSWR will remain 2:1 and the transmitter will probably
handle it.

The only consideration that could make a difference is--if the
transmitter's ALC uses a diode voltage-detectior referenced to a desired
power ouput into a 50 Ohm load, the transmitter will try to deliver more
power into the 25 Ohm load than into the 100 Ohm load.

Rick  K1BQT


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:34 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 96 12:14:29 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1d.delphi.com
X-To: altavoz <[e-mail]>

altavoz <[e-mail]> writes:

>altavoz: No, a 50 ohm ant' feeding a 75ohm coax will
>cause a SWR into coax and towards the radio and an exact
>length of coax will not reduce the SWR except as
>attenuation factor over that length.

Most people know this is true already. What Steve is
trying to say is if one has a 50 ohm antenna and feeds
it with a multiple of a halfwavelength of 75 ohm coax,
then the 50 ohm SWR meter at the transmitter will read
1:1 and the transmitter will see 50 ohms. There will
be a conjugate match at the 75 to 50 ohm transition
point and all the reflected energy will be re-reflected
back towards the antenna at that point. With no tuner
in the circuit, any length of coax other than a multiple
of halfwavelengths will upset the conjugate match and
allow reflected energy to be dissipated in the protection
circuitry or the final amp itself. So there is a magic
length that the 75 ohm coax can be trimmed to to achieve
the desired conjugate match.

This can be visualized as two quarter wave transformers.
The first one transforms the 50 ohm antenna impedance
to 100 ohms in the middle of the halfwavelength of 75
ohm coax and the second one transforms that 100 ohms
back to 50 ohms, making the transmitter happy.

73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:35 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-3.sprintlink.net!coopnews.coop.net!csnews!boulder!csn!nntp-xfer-1.csn.net!ncar!noao!ennfs.eas.asu.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 14:10:35 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Cecil Moore wrote:
>
> altavoz <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> >altavoz: No, a 50 ohm ant' feeding a 75ohm coax will
> >cause a SWR into coax and towards the radio and an exact
> >length of coax will not reduce the SWR except as
> >attenuation factor over that length.
>
> Most people know this is true already. What Steve is
> trying to say is if one has a 50 ohm antenna and feeds
> it with a multiple of a halfwavelength of 75 ohm coax,
> then the 50 ohm SWR meter at the transmitter will read
> 1:1 and the transmitter will see 50 ohms. There will
> be a conjugate match at the 75 to 50 ohm transition
> point and all the reflected energy will be re-reflected
> back towards the antenna at that point. With no tuner
> in the circuit, any length of coax other than a multiple
> of halfwavelengths will upset the conjugate match and
> allow reflected energy to be dissipated in the protection
> circuitry or the final amp itself. So there is a magic
> length that the 75 ohm coax can be trimmed to to achieve
> the desired conjugate match.
>
> This can be visualized as two quarter wave transformers.
> The first one transforms the 50 ohm antenna impedance
> to 100 ohms in the middle of the halfwavelength of 75
> ohm coax and the second one transforms that 100 ohms
> back to 50 ohms, making the transmitter happy.
>
> 73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC


altavoz: Beatiful ! But absolutely wrong !

A TRANSMISSION LINE ,REGARDLESS OF LENGTH, TERMINATED IN A
RESISTANCE NOT EQUAL TO ITS Z0 WILL HAVE A UNIFORM SWR ALONG
ITS LENGTH WHICH DECREASES SLIGTHLY THRU ATTENUATION OF
THE LINE. Half wave sections dont match anything, only
1/4w sections match unequal sections.


______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:37 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (A N Thompson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: 28 Oct 96 15:42:07 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 52
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Cecil was right when he stated that a half-wavelength
of 75 ohm coax would produce a 1:1 match for a 50
ohm source when the coax is connected to a 50 ohm
load. See the ARRL Antenna Book, 17th ed., p. 24-12:
   "When the line length is an even multiple of 90║ (that
     is, a multiple of ╜ wavelength), the input resistance
     is equal to the load resistance, regardless of the
     line Zo... It does not matter whether the impedence
     ...is resistive, reactive, or a combination of both."
( I actually tested this experimentally tonight with a
resistive load and the results confirmed the theory).

Altavoz's assertion that "only 1/4 wave sections match
unequal sections" is incorrect.  Quarter-wavelength
matching sections are a special case of series-section
transformers.  Read  "Series-Section Transformers" in
the same ARRL  Antenna Book, pp. 26-15.

73,

Arliss
W7XU

>Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 14:10:35 -0800
>From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
>Subject: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?

>> altavoz <[e-mail]> writes:
>>
>> >altavoz: No, a 50 ohm ant' feeding a 75ohm coax will
>> >cause a SWR into coax and towards the radio and an exact
>> >length of coax will not reduce the SWR except as
>> >attenuation factor over that length.
>>
>> Most people know this is true already. What Steve is
>> trying to say is if one has a 50 ohm antenna and feeds
>> it with a multiple of a halfwavelength of 75 ohm coax,
>> then the 50 ohm SWR meter at the transmitter will read
>> 1:1 and the transmitter will see 50 ohms.

     (portions deleted)

>> 73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC
>
>
>altavoz: Beatiful ! But absolutely wrong !
>
>A TRANSMISSION LINE ,REGARDLESS OF LENGTH, TERMINATED IN A
>RESISTANCE NOT EQUAL TO ITS Z0 WILL HAVE A UNIFORM SWR ALONG
>ITS LENGTH WHICH DECREASES SLIGTHLY THRU ATTENUATION OF
>THE LINE. Half wave sections dont match anything, only
>1/4w sections match unequal sections.


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:38 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!news-m01.ny.us.ibm.net!news-s01.ca.us.ibm.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail]@smtp-news2.ibm.net
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: 28 Oct 1996 14:03:03 GMT
Lines: 63
Message-ID: <552een$26iq$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]@smtp-gw01.ny.us.ibm.net
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip129-37-205-158.in.us.ibm.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 2.0

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (A N Thompson) writes
:
>Cecil was right when he stated that a half-wavelength
>of 75 ohm coax would produce a 1:1 match for a 50
>ohm source when the coax is connected to a 50 ohm
>load. See the ARRL Antenna Book, 17th ed., p. 24-12:
>   "When the line length is an even multiple of 90║ (that
>     is, a multiple of ╜ wavelength), the input resistance
>     is equal to the load resistance, regardless of the
>     line Zo... It does not matter whether the impedence
>     ...is resistive, reactive, or a combination of both."
>( I actually tested this experimentally tonight with a
>resistive load and the results confirmed the theory).
>
>Altavoz's assertion that "only 1/4 wave sections match
>unequal sections" is incorrect.  Quarter-wavelength
>matching sections are a special case of series-section
>transformers.  Read  "Series-Section Transformers" in
>the same ARRL  Antenna Book, pp. 26-15.
>
>73,
>
>Arliss
>W7XU
>
>>Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 14:10:35 -0800
>>From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
>>Subject: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
>
>>> altavoz <[e-mail]> writes:
>>>
>>> >altavoz: No, a 50 ohm ant' feeding a 75ohm coax will
>>> >cause a SWR into coax and towards the radio and an exact
>>> >length of coax will not reduce the SWR except as
>>> >attenuation factor over that length.
>>>
>>> Most people know this is true already. What Steve is
>>> trying to say is if one has a 50 ohm antenna and feeds
>>> it with a multiple of a halfwavelength of 75 ohm coax,
>>> then the 50 ohm SWR meter at the transmitter will read
>>> 1:1 and the transmitter will see 50 ohms.
>
>     (portions deleted)
>
>>> 73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC
>>
>>
>>altavoz: Beatiful ! But absolutely wrong !
>>
>>A TRANSMISSION LINE ,REGARDLESS OF LENGTH, TERMINATED IN A
>>RESISTANCE NOT EQUAL TO ITS Z0 WILL HAVE A UNIFORM SWR ALONG
>>ITS LENGTH WHICH DECREASES SLIGTHLY THRU ATTENUATION OF
>>THE LINE. Half wave sections dont match anything, only
>>1/4w sections match unequal sections.


   Cecil is correct on this one. Experiment with an electrical halfwave length
 and
   you will see. Remember, that bandwidth over which this occurs is pretty nar
row.
   I use a 3/4 inch 75 ohm feedline between a 4-1K and my Mosely yagi some 150
'
  feet away. SWR=flat, but I don't use that feed more than 5 KC up or down fro
m
  14.183. It works very well, well enough that I don't use an antenna tuner at
 all
  on that setup.

                                                                  - Jim


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:39 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.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: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 08:20:21 -0800
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.102.182
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

altavoz wrote:
> altavoz: Beatiful ! But absolutely wrong !
> Half wave sections dont match anything...

Hi Altavoz, Sorry to have to bust your bubble but a half-
wavelength of any impedance transmission line faithfully
reproduces the impedance of the load (minus losses). With
a 50 ohm antenna and no losses in the transmission line,
the following is true.

Transmission line     SWR     Impedance seen at the transmitter

1/2 WL of 50 ohm      1:1         50 ohms
1/2 WL of 75 ohm      1.5:1       50 ohms
1/2 WL of 300 ohm     6:1         50 ohms
1/2 WL of 450 ohm     9:1         50 ohms

So you see a half-wave section matches the impedance of the
antenna regardless of the magnitude of the SWR. If the SWR
is anything other than 1:1, a half-wavelength (or multiple)
is the *only* length that will match the 50 ohms of the
antenna.

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


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:40 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!mr.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!olivea!bznews.apple.com!nntp1.apple.com!news
From: Kok Chen <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 11:25:04 -0700
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: chenko2.apple.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Macintosh; I; 68K)

altavoz wrote:

>Cecil Moore wrote:
>>
>> Most people know this is true already. What Steve is
>> trying to say is if one has a 50 ohm antenna and feeds
>> it with a multiple of a halfwavelength of 75 ohm coax,
>> then the 50 ohm SWR meter at the transmitter will read
>> 1:1 and the transmitter will see 50 ohms....
>> So there is a magic
>> length that the 75 ohm coax can be trimmed to to achieve
>> the desired conjugate match.
>
>altavoz: Beatiful ! But absolutely wrong !
>
>A TRANSMISSION LINE ,REGARDLESS OF LENGTH, TERMINATED IN A
>RESISTANCE NOT EQUAL TO ITS Z0 WILL HAVE A UNIFORM SWR ALONG
>ITS LENGTH WHICH DECREASES SLIGTHLY THRU ATTENUATION OF
>THE LINE. Half wave sections dont match anything, only
>1/4w sections match unequal sections.


Cecil is (again) correct.

I did not see Cecil make any claim that the VSWR in the 75-ohm LINE
is 1:1.  All he said was that if you terminate one end of a 1/2
wavelength 75-ohm transmission line with 50+i0 ohm load that you will
see 50+i0 ohm at the other end.

Indeed, you can use a 1/2 wavelength line of any impedance.

Just visualise going around a Smith chart in a concentric circle, eh?

73

Kok Chen, AA6TY               [e-mail]
Apple Computer, Inc.


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:41 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!scnews.sc.intel.com!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 08:26:52 -0800
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.102.182
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30586 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41326 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20539 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117115

altavoz wrote:
> ... therefore it will radiate cause the open end of the coax
> will see a short on the outside end of the coax at the radio end.
> ...Trimming 1/4w will peak the FEEDLINE RADIATION.

How is the RF current going to get past the choke?

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


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:42 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 10:08:55 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 185.los-angeles-007.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30590 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41329 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20540 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117116

Cecil Moore wrote:
>
> altavoz wrote:
> > ... therefore it will radiate cause the open end of the coax
> > will see a short on the outside end of the coax at the radio end.
> > ...Trimming 1/4w will peak the FEEDLINE RADIATION.
>
> How is the RF current going to get past the choke?
>
> 73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


altavoz: You're assuming a choke . The thread makes more sense
if you dont assume a choke ( i went all the way back to JOEL
GAMBLEs post)


I think he's saying a 440 signal into RG58 is a 1:1 NO MATTER
WHAT cause it's 100 feet long and that means it could be an
open circuit . I think he tried to get one past us by making
us assume that there was a termination .
  Anyway the way to kill it is BALUN,steel wool, ferrite,
cut coax to a particular length ( narrow BW), or offset feed
the antenna ( bal ant has an unbal' point where you can hook
coax, and pattern does not suffer ).
  What i find amasing is so many novices worry about the
match , but not the radiation pattern . You can match
anything, even a 1/2w by stretching it a little to bring
down the R and that 2nd lobe is too small to hurt .
  Radiation pattern on a J pole is bad but has a nice
stub to match it....so build a 5/8w using that stub to match
it. Problem is the standard way ( "L" )is just as simple.
  Thanks for correcting my sloppy thinking, 73's




______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:43 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 10:23:02 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <550510$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 185.los-angeles-007.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

K1BQT wrote:
>
> altavoz: well said, N6PL Paul H. Lee had a book on verticals
> that shows how to "wrap" a 2:1 SWR at 80 meters to cover
> the whole band . It will work at any frequency . Passive
> components only .
>
> You can do this--but with significant reduction in efficiency as you move
> away from Fr (see Frank Witt's work with 80-meter dipoles in the ARRL
> Antenna Handbook for more on this).  The point I wanted to make is that
> impedance may change with line length, but true VSWR will not (save for
> the influence of line loss).  That is to say, 25 Ohms may be transformed
> to 100 Ohms--or to any complex impedance on the Smith Chart in between--by
> the line, but the VSWR will remain 2:1 and the transmitter will probably
> handle it.
>
> The only consideration that could make a difference is--if the
> transmitter's ALC uses a diode voltage-detectior referenced to a desired
> power ouput into a 50 Ohm load, the transmitter will try to deliver more
> power into the 25 Ohm load than into the 100 Ohm load.
>
> Rick  K1BQT


altavoz: The reduction in eff' is in the caps/coils at the
feed point ( except for pattern change) and that was as
good as you could do in those days . Today , an AUTO
TUNER is a smaller part of a persons
paycheck compared to 20 years ago . Thats the way
i do it since i found a $150 ICOM auto tune, then found
a $40 one at swap meet. With cap hat, 160 thru 10 .
 However , i dont do much HF ,as i find very few want
to talk tech on HF.
  I think IC735 actually reads SWR ?
Not talking at you , just broadcasting to the group....
 HF can handle tuner at either end of RG8 ( FOAM is not required)
VHF absolutely needs RG8 FOAM and tuner at the antenna. A VHF
1/4w vert' with radials bent down about 45 deg is a perfect
50 OHM match to coax, but pattern or GAIN is better if you bend
down all the way . And RINGO RANGER II is the best ant for the
money ( flea mkt $30, 2 5/8 waves colinear)






______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:44 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!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,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 10:05:18 -0800
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.102.182
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30598 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20543

altavoz wrote:
> No, you can't fool the transmitter...

and later altavoz wrote:

> The 1/4w 70 ohm coax converts the 100 (ohm) antenna to
> 50 ohms to please the radio.

So Altavoz, please tell us the difference between "fooling
the transmitter" and "pleasing the radio"?

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


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:45 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!scnews.sc.intel.com!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 10:17:40 -0800
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.102.182
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30599 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20544

Cecil Moore wrote:
> So Altavoz, please tell us the difference between "fooling
> the transmitter" and "pleasing the radio"?

My apologies, I posted this before I received the following:

>altavoz: My mistake . YOU ARE RIGHT .  The Z from a 50 ohm
>load will go up as you move towards the transmiter on coax
>thats higher than 50ohm and will go lower on coax thats less
>then 50ohms.

Please ignore the previous posting. I'll be glad when netnews
is real-time.

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


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:47 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!psinntp!psinntp!jeefers.microdes.com!usenet
From: Dave Hand <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 16:35:46 -0500
Organization: Micro Design International, Inc.
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dhand.mdi.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30623 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41353 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20551 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117138

altavoz wrote:
>
> > It's possible to use a cable with an impedance not
> > equal to the characteristic impedance of your
> > antenna and rig. For example, a half wave length
> > of 75 ohm cable will work between a 50 ohm antenna
> > and a 50 ohm transmitter.  You can also use 75 ohm
> > cable to match a 100 ohm antenna to a 50 ohm rig
> > by cutting it to the right length.  Unfortunately,
> > these tricks generally only work at one frequency.
> >
> > In this case, the length of the cable is critical
> > to a given frequency.
> >
> > Steve KT4FY
>
> altavoz: No, a 50 ohm ant' feeding a 75ohm coax will
> cause a SWR into coax and towards the radio and an exact
> length of coax will not reduce the SWR except as
> attenuation factor over that length.
>
>
> ______End of text  from altavoz___________

Wrong O buddy boy.

An electrical 1/2 of coax is a tried and true method of mesuring
the SWR at the antenna feed point remotely for exactly that reason.
Its totally invisible to the remote test gear. If you doubt it try it!

Dave Hand WB4HYP


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:48 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 09:50:48 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 185.los-angeles-007.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)
To: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>

Cecil Moore wrote:
>
> altavoz wrote:
> > altavoz: Beatiful ! But absolutely wrong !
> > Half wave sections dont match anything...
>
> Hi Altavoz, Sorry to have to bust your bubble but a half-
> wavelength of any impedance transmission line faithfully
> reproduces the impedance of the load (minus losses). With
> a 50 ohm antenna and no losses in the transmission line,
> the following is true.
>
> Transmission line     SWR     Impedance seen at the transmitter
>
> 1/2 WL of 50 ohm      1:1         50 ohms
> 1/2 WL of 75 ohm      1.5:1       50 ohms
> 1/2 WL of 300 ohm     6:1         50 ohms
> 1/2 WL of 450 ohm     9:1         50 ohms
>
> So you see a half-wave section matches the impedance of the
> antenna regardless of the magnitude of the SWR. If the SWR
> is anything other than 1:1, a half-wavelength (or multiple)
> is the *only* length that will match the 50 ohms of the
> antenna.
>
> 73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)



altavoz: My mistake . YOU ARE RIGHT .  The Z from a 50 ohm
load will go up as you move towards the transmiter on coax
thats higher than 50ohm and will go lower on coax thats less
then 50ohms. At 1/4w it will be highest and resistive ( geometric
mean) and at the half wave point ,AS YOU HAVE VERY WELL SHOWN,
it is the same as the load since a half wave looks like a series
resanant circuit .





______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:51 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 96 01:51:49 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1e.delphi.com
X-To: Mandy Wright <[e-mail]>

Mandy Wright <[e-mail]> writes:

>If the transmitter impedence equals the transmission line impedence then
>the returning wave, seeing a perfect match, is disippated, warming up
>the amplifier.

Hi Mandy/Tim, Some thought previously that Walter Maxwell had
said this was not the case in "Reflections". Mr Maxwell wrote
me a nice letter explaining that in his book, he was always
referring to tube type transmitters with pi-net outputs
that had achieved a Zg-match. For transmitters with fixed
50 ohm outputs, it would be a Z0-match. For either a Zg or
Z0-match, there is a change in impedance. It does seem safe
to say that if there's no change in impedance, reflected
energy will not be re-reflected. Of course, some of the
reflected energy is often used by the protection circuitry
to decrease the output of the amplifier, thus reducing the
reflected energy.

If one understands what happens to the reflected energy in
the following example, one has a handle on the physics.

----50 ohm coax----+----0.5WL 300 ohm line----+--50 ohm load

                   A                          B

Reflections occur at point B. When the reflected energy
gets back to point A, it sees a Z0-match and is 100%
re-reflected at that point. Physically, it is exactly
the same thing that happens to light in a reflection-
less picture frame. No reflected energy flows in the
50 ohm coax in the above example.

73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:52 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 09:33:44 -0800
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.102.182
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

altavoz wrote:
> altavoz: No , its not a conjugate match . A 1/2w is not a conjugate
> match . Conjugate means to change the sign of the REACTANCE.
>   There's no sign change in a 1/2w .

Well let's see -

---50ohm coax---A---1/2WL 75ohm coax---B---50ohm load

Are there reflections in the 75 ohm coax? yes
Are there reflections in the 50 ohm coax? no
Sure looks like there is a Z0 match at point A
which forces a conjugate match in the rest of
the system. Remember the conjugate of 50+j0
is 50-j0. :-)

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


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:53 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 17:51:28 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 102.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Kok Chen wrote:
>
> altavoz wrote:
>
> >Cecil Moore wrote:
> >>
> >> Most people know this is true already. What Steve is
> >> trying to say is if one has a 50 ohm antenna and feeds
> >> it with a multiple of a halfwavelength of 75 ohm coax,
> >> then the 50 ohm SWR meter at the transmitter will read
> >> 1:1 and the transmitter will see 50 ohms....
> >> So there is a magic
> >> length that the 75 ohm coax can be trimmed to to achieve
> >> the desired conjugate match.

altavoz: No , its not a conjugate match . A 1/2w is not a conjugate
match . Conjugate means to change the sign of the REACTANCE.
  There's no sign change in a 1/2w .


> Just visualise going around a Smith chart in a concentric circle, eh?
> Kok Chen, AA6TY               [e-mail]
> Apple Computer, Inc.

altavoz: Yes i use my Smith chart often thats how i corrected
myself on the 1/2w and notified him that i had made a mistake.

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:55 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news.efn.org!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Dick Hughes)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 20:56:56 GMT
Organization: Oregon Public Networking
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <555iku$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dynip177.efn.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.299

On 29 Oct 1996 13:33:02 -0500, [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:

>In article <[e-mail]>, Dave Hand <[e-mail]>
>writes:
>
>>
>>Wrong O buddy boy.
>>
>>An electrical 1/2 of coax is a tried and true method of mesuring
>>the SWR at the antenna feed point remotely for exactly that reason.
>>Its totally invisible to the remote test gear. If you doubt it try it!
>>
>>Dave Hand WB4HYP
>
>Sorry Dave, but he's right.
>
>The length of line does NOT change the SWR along the line, except by
>attenuation and various equipment shortcomings.
>
>73 Tom

I think all of you are right.  It's just how you are expressing it.
Dave is merely saying that an electrical 1/2 wave of coax will mirror
what it see's at one end to the other end.

To quote the good book, "... a line an exact multiple of 1/2 wave in
length (disregarding line losses) simply repeats, at its input or
sending end, whatever impedance exists at its output or receiving end.
It does not matter whether the impedance at the receiving end is
resistive, reactive, or a combination of both.  Sections of line
having such length can be cut in or out without changing any of the
operating conditions..."  15th Addition of The ARRL Antenna Book.

Dick Hughes - W6CCD


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:55 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.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: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: 29 Oct 1996 13:33:02 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 18
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <555iku$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

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

>
>Wrong O buddy boy.
>
>An electrical 1/2 of coax is a tried and true method of mesuring
>the SWR at the antenna feed point remotely for exactly that reason.
>Its totally invisible to the remote test gear. If you doubt it try it!
>
>Dave Hand WB4HYP

Sorry Dave, but he's right.

The length of line does NOT change the SWR along the line, except by
attenuation and various equipment shortcomings.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:57 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 12:00:30 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 140.los-angeles-007.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Cecil Moore wrote:
>
> altavoz wrote:
> > altavoz: No , its not a conjugate match . A 1/2w is not a conjugate
> > match . Conjugate means to change the sign of the REACTANCE.
> >   There's no sign change in a 1/2w .
>
> Well let's see -
>
> ---50ohm coax---A---1/2WL 75ohm coax---B---50ohm load
>
> Are there reflections in the 75 ohm coax? yes
> Are there reflections in the 50 ohm coax? no
> Sure looks like there is a Z0 match at point A
> which forces a conjugate match in the rest of
> the system. Remember the conjugate of 50+j0
> is 50-j0. :-)
>
> 73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


altavoz: page 16-11 ARRl " Conjugate matching is obtained
thru a controlled wave interference between 2 sets of
reflected waves.."

In your case there is no intertference and NO CONJUGATE MATCH.
--

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:58 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!metro.atlanta.com!news.radio.org!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 07:20:06 GMT
Lines: 42
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30696 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41389 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20576 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117179

In article <[e-mail]> altavoz <[e-mail]>
 writes:
>> It's possible to use a cable with an impedance not
>> equal to the characteristic impedance of your
>> antenna and rig. For example, a half wave length
>> of 75 ohm cable will work between a 50 ohm antenna
>> and a 50 ohm transmitter.  You can also use 75 ohm
>> cable to match a 100 ohm antenna to a 50 ohm rig
>> by cutting it to the right length.  Unfortunately,
>> these tricks generally only work at one frequency.
>>
>> In this case, the length of the cable is critical
>> to a given frequency.
>>
>> Steve KT4FY
>
>altavoz: No, a 50 ohm ant' feeding a 75ohm coax will
>cause a SWR into coax and towards the radio and an exact
>length of coax will not reduce the SWR except as
>attenuation factor over that length.

You two are talking about different things. Sure, the SWR on
the cable will not be unity, but if you cut the cable to an
electrical halfwave (or multiple), you *don't care* because
the impedance seen by the source is a repetition of the
impedance presented by the load. The source doesn't care
about SWR on the cable, it only cares that it sees the
correct impedance presented to it.

In the case of a 100 ohm load and a 50 ohm source, an electrical
1/4-wave of 75 ohm cable will transform the load impedance to
50 ohms at the source end of the cable. The source will be happy,
the load will be happy, and we'll be real happy there is SWR on
the cable, because it is this SWR which makes the transformation
happen. A "high" SWR isn't always bad, in fact it can be downright
useful at times.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | Due to provider problems
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | with previous uucp address
es
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | Email to [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:20:59 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!csulb.edu!info.ucla.edu!psgrain!news.rain.net!hevanet.com!usenet
From: "miker in Tigard, OR." <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 01:56:16 -0800
Organization: Hevanet Communications
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ke-ppp04.hevanet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30728 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41410 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20595 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117204

Dick Hughes wrote:
>
> On Thu, 24 Oct 1996 14:07:27 GMT, [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
> wrote:
>
> >In article <54nc7a$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (James Pollock) w
rites:
> >>   I have a friend who swears up and down that the length of the
> >>coaxial cable to maintain resonance at a given frequency is important
> >>for reducing the SWR.  He feels that it acts in a similar principal to
> >>the fact that the elements of an antenna must be cut to the correct
> >>length for the antenna to be resonant at a given frequency.
> >>
> >>   It seems to me I have also read somewhere that this is a myth.  I
> >>need the true scoop on this.  I'm preparing to put up a pretty good
> >>antenna system on my roof (a homebrew 10 meter antenna cut to exactly
> >>the middle of the band), and don't want to purchase an extra 6 ft of
> >>Belden 9913 coax only to have it looped up and losing signal, when in
> >>reality I could of used 20 feet instead of 26 feet of cable.
> >
> >Ok, this can get complex because there are several interrelated
> >things happening here. Lets take them one at a time.
> >
> >The only thing that determines SWR on a transmission line is
> >the ratio of the characteristic impedance of the line to the
> >impedance presented by *the load*. Nothing you can do at the
> >generator end can affect SWR, and changing the length of the
> >cable won't change SWR either (but see below).
>
> <huge snip>
>
> >Gary
>
> In general, the correct length of coax for an HF antenna is the
> distance it takes to get from the transmitter to the antenna.  Don't
> worry about length.
>
> Dick Hughes - W6CCD


There's an important issue that has not been mentioned.
If your SWR is 1:1, coax length is unimportant.
If it's not, then the impedance looking into the coax is a function
of the length.  Draw a (constant SWR) circle on a Smith Chart.  As you
change length,
you move around that circle.  As long as your transmiter can match
any impedance on the circle, you're OK.  With a high SWR or with a
modern no-tune rig, you might find that the rig behaves significantly
differently depending on the coax length.  SWR doesn't change, but
the matching network required to drive the coax sure does.

Having said that, I suggest you put your effort into making the antenna
1:1 rather than messing with the coax length.

miker


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:00 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!Austria.EU.net!01-newsfeed.univie.ac.at!02-newsfeed.univie.ac.at!newsfeed.sunet.se!news00.sunet.se!sunic!mn6.swip.net!mn5.swip.net!news
From: Maude Schyffert <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Ionosphere reflection theory
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 10:10:43 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup106-1-10.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 3.0Gold (Win16; I)
To: [e-mail]

Dan Metzger wrote:
>
> Can anybody give me a physical explanation of why certain frequencies
> are reflected by certain layers of the ionosphere, while others are
> absorbed or allowed to pass right through?  Is it something about
> molecular resonance and the different frequencies; or something about
> the differring wavelengths?  Nothing very deep; I'm just looking for a
> glimmer of insight.  (e-mail copy of reply appreciated- work schedule
> often makes me miss postings)    73 - Dan, K8JWR
Well, I guess yoy need te read a couple of books, it's not that simple.

M


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:01 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!ais.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-8.sprintlink.net!interpath!news.interpath.net!news.interpath.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Curt Phillips)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Isotron-antenna ?
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 21:57:40 GMT
Organization: Mystic Knights of the Sea
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <54rckc$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: cphillips.pdial.interpath.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Joachim Seibert <[e-mail]> wrote:
>I am looking for information on the Isotron-antennas. My main interest
>is in
>"home-building" such a thing... What kind of experience did You make
>with
>Isotrons?

  A retired radio engineer in the Raleigh Amateur Radio Society has built a
couple of "homebrew, Isotron-type" antennas with pretty good success.

  I don't think he's on Internet, but I'll check.  If he can't e-mail you,
I'll see if I can get him to put some of his experiences on diskette, and
I'll e-mail them to you.

========= Opinions expressed are solely those of the author ==========
Curt Phillips, CEM KD4YU (ex-WB4LHI)|"I don't want to achieve
Engineer/Writer/Gadgeteer/Raconteur | immortality through my work.
Chairman, Tar Heel Scanner/SWL Group| I want to achieve it through
ARRL Life; QCWA; Raleigh ARS; NRA   | NOT DYING."     -- Woody Allen
==== [e-mail] ==== [Copyright 1996 All rights reserved]====



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:02 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news-m01.ny.us.ibm.net!news-s01.ca.us.ibm.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Isotron-antenna ST
Date: 24 Oct 1996 16:17:24 GMT
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <54o4qk$1t4o$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip129-37-242-142.ca.us.ibm.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <[e-mail]>, Mandy Wright <[e-mail].
uk> writes:
>In article <[e-mail]>, Joachim
>Seibert <[e-mail]> writes
>>Dear reader,
>>
>>I am looking for information on the Isotron-antennas.

Isotron antennas are a trade name for a type of antenna manufactured and
sold by Bilal Co. in Colorado.  They sell by mail order, and normally have
a monthly ad in CQ and QST.

I've used them.  E-mail me if you have questions.

Roger J. Buffington
W6VZV
[e-mail]

USC Law School, Class of '97

--------------------------------------------------
"I want to die peacefully, in my sleep, like my Grandfather."
"Not screaming, and in terror, like his passengers."
--------------------------------------------------



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:03 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news-m01.ny.us.ibm.net!news-s01.ca.us.ibm.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Isotron-antenna ST
Date: 25 Oct 1996 17:17:03 GMT
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <54qsmf$3ebe$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54o4qk$1t4o$[e-mail]> <claude.846228948@bauv111>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip129-37-242-144.ca.us.ibm.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <claude.846228948@bauv111>, [e-mail] (Claude Frantz) w
rites:
>[e-mail] writes:
>
>>Isotron antennas are a trade name for a type of antenna manufactured and
>>sold by Bilal Co. in Colorado.  They sell by mail order, and normally have
>>a monthly ad in CQ and QST.
>
>>I've used them.  E-mail me if you have questions.
>
>Please give us your opinion here. There are probably many hams interested.
>--
>Claude
>([e-mail])
>The opinions expressed above represent those of the writer
>and not necessarily those of her employer.

No problem.  I was in a hurry yesterday.

20M Isotron:

My 20M Isotron worked, but not well.  It had a good SWR curve.  However,
its signal on both receive and send was consistently 2 to 3 S-units (not DB)
below a wire dipole at a similar height.  The antenna is definitely inferior
to a wire dipole by a huge margin.

My 40M Isotron loaded up OK, but did not appear to work at all well.  It
essentially acted as nothing but a dummy load.  It was completely unusable.
This was my experience, as well as another local ham's, using two different
Isotrons.  Bottom line: I don't think that the 40M Isotron is a working produc
t.

My advice is that any wire antenna of a conventional type will be a much bette
r
choice than the Isotron.  I would not recommend the Isotron to anyone for
any purpose.

Roger J. Buffington
W6VZV
[e-mail]

USC Law School, Class of '97

--------------------------------------------------
"I want to die peacefully, in my sleep, like my Grandfather."
"Not screaming, and in terror, like his passengers."
--------------------------------------------------



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:04 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.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: J-pole design
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 18:54:45 -0400
Organization: OneNet Communications HUB News Server
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port-2-27.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)

Mark K Flanagan wrote:
>
> It is my understanding, which is reinforced by the ARRL
> Antenna Book, that a J-pole is a Zepp Antenna without
> the angle in it, example:
>
>   Zepp Antenna:
>                                     1/2 wavelength
>          o
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>   |      |
>   |      |
>   |      |     1/4 wavelength
>   |      |
>   |      |
>   o     o
> Balanced Feed
>
> So technically it is a full wavelength antenna with one side
> feeding a 1/4 wavelength section and the other side feeding
> a 3/4 wavelength section.
>
> P.S. How was I supposed to decipher the MSDOS program?

No, that is not correct.

A j-pole is an end-fed half-wave vertical with stub matching.  The feed is
usually not balanced, and it is not at the end of the 1/4 wavelength section.
Looking at your diagram, the point you have shown as "Balanced Feed" is
shorted, and the actual feed is at a point (usually determined by trial and
error) above that point where the impedance is 50 ohms (or whatever is
desired.  Also, the end of the 1/2-wave section must be connected to one of
the two arms of the stub; the stub does not tap into the 1/2-wave section.


Rich   W2RG


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:05 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.cdsnet.net!news.magicnet.net!feed1.news.erols.com!insync!enews.sgi.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: J-pole design
Date: 26 Oct 1996 02:42:28 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 16
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54sbsk$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Mark K Flanagan) writes:

>
>So technically it is a full wavelength antenna with one side
>feeding a 1/4 wavelength section and the other side feeding
>a 3/4 wavelength section.

Technically it is a 1/4 wl matching stub feeding a 1/2 wl radiator. When
you fold an antenna element over into a parallel close spaced transmission
line, it's called a stub.

When you open a transmission line up and make the spacing wide (allowing
it to intentionally radiate), it's called an antenna.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:06 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: J-pole design
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 12:20:07 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <54sbsk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 185.los-angeles-007.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

W8JI Tom wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
> (Mark K Flanagan) writes:
>
> >
> >So technically it is a full wavelength antenna with one side
> >feeding a 1/4 wavelength section and the other side feeding
> >a 3/4 wavelength section.
>
> Technically it is a 1/4 wl matching stub feeding a 1/2 wl radiator. When
> you fold an antenna element over into a parallel close spaced transmission
> line, it's called a stub.
>
> When you open a transmission line up and make the spacing wide (allowing
> it to intentionally radiate), it's called an antenna.
>
> 73 Tom


altavoz: J poles dont work . They have a poor main lobe
as bad as a 1/4 wave.
  5/8w is best .  17% better than 1/2w , 41% better than
1/4w ( F.C.C. , theorectical)

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:07 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.texas.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!moon.why.net!news
From: john fleenor <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: john's ham page
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 20:16:47 -0800
Organization: The Why? Network
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.240.253.48
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; U)

http://www.why.net/home/jlfleenor


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:08 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!insync!news.azstarnet.com!usr12ip14.azstarnet.com!n7ws
From: [e-mail] (Wes Stewart)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Johnson Matchbox
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 08:04:43 LOCAL
Organization: Starnet
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr12ip14.azstarnet.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
m (R. L. Measures ) writes:
>From: [e-mail] (R. L. Measures )
>Subject: Re: Johnson Matchbox
>Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 13:35:40 -0700

[snip]

>..... Since
>the operating-Q of an L-network is lower than the operating Q of any other
>tuner circuit, .... [snip]

Absolutely false.

>--
>--Rich-- AG6K, 805.386.3734

Wes Stewart -- N7WS



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:09 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!news-lond.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-paris.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-stkh.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!sn.no!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.mindspring.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Johnson Matchbox
Date: 30 Oct 1996 03:33:46 GMT
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises
Lines: 27
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <556iaq$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54qo24$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip58.herndon9.va.interramp.com
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.7J PL01 (x86 32bit)

This discussion is what I have been looking for. :)

In article <54qo24$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
>
>     [e-mail] (R. L. Measures ) wrote:
>
>> If you are interested in building a tuner that has fewer drawbacks
>>for feeding balanced loads,  the balanced-L-network tuner deserves
>>consideration.
>
>Hi Rick,
>
>That design was discussed here some time back.  The one
>significant disadvantage that came to light concerns common
>mode current.  Because there is no common mode isolation
>between the feedline and the transmitter, common mode currents
>created by unbalanced or non-symmetrical loads can appear on the
>chassis of the rig.
>

Can this common mode current problem of balanced L (Pi or T) network be
solved by using 1:1(or 4:1) current balun at tuner input?

---
 Takashi Mori, AA9AT/4



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:10 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-8.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!athos.itribe.net!global.gc.net!sourcebbs!bob.roach
From: [e-mail] (BOB ROACH)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re:  Johnson Matchbox mes
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 96 08:34:00 -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: 23

RLM>-I sold my low-power Johnson Matchboxu for $60 after testing proved how
   >-limited the matching range really was.  With the high-power Matchboxu, th
e

   >-used in the  Matchbox is not ideal for matching balanced feedlines that
   >-are not perfectly balanced, which few are.

   >-consideration.  It has a wider Z-matching range than the Matchboxu, and i
s

   >-Matchboxu circuit.

Hi Rich,

I noticed the strange character at the end of the word matchbox in your
message.  Don't know whether it would cause problems or not.  Some non
standard characters can screw up some BBS's, offline readers and the
like.  Just wanted let you know it was there.

73
Bob
KE4QOK


 * SLMR 2.1a * Any sufficiently advanced magic looks like technology.


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:11 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.vol.it!peroni.ita.tip.net!newsfeed.tip.net!news.jos.net!dos.canit.se!seunet!mn7.swip.net!mn6.swip.net!mn5.swip.net!news
From: Maude Schyffert <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Log Periodic antenna vs Yagi
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 09:59:44 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup122-6-12.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 3.0Gold (Win16; I)
To: [e-mail]

Tony Preston wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Do you have any experience of using a Log Periodic antenna for HF?
>
> I am currently looking at upgrading from my tri-band beam. How does a
> Log Periodic compare with a tri-band Yagi, and how does it compare with
> a mono-band Yagi?
>
> If you have tried a Log Periodic for HF, I would appreciate your
> comments, advice, and any technical details on their performance (e.g.
> gain).

A single band yagi is normally better than a LP antenna. LP has better
bandwith and therefore, normally less gain and F/B ratio.

If you are one or two bands a monobande yagi should be more
cost-effective.

SM0BKZ


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:11 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!arclight.uoregon.edu!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!howland.erols.net!EU.net!chsun!news.eunet.ch!usenet
From: sebastien <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Looking for antenna program
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 10:38:11 +0200
Organization: EUnet AG
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp3.infomaniak.ch
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; U)

Hello, thanks to read me. I'm HB9ICC, Sebastien in Geneva.

I'm looking for a program to calculate a parabola-antenna.

If you have this program, please contact me or send me a copy into my

E-Mail.

Thanks in advance and very Best 73's.

HB9ICC, Sebastien .

E-Mail:    [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:12 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.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] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Looking for antenna program
Date: 26 Oct 1996 11:43:11 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 11
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54tbif$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hi Sebastien--

Calculate WHAT for a parabola: gain? beamwidth? Efficiency? I assume you
don't mean NEC type programs (which approximate parabolas with wire grids
with some success).

Do you just need the equations?

73

Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:13 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: [e-mail] (Otulp)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Looking for antenna program - antenna.zip (0/1)
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 14:39:37 GMT
Organization: none
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <327373bc.2048164@204.127.3.4>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Post it here
NNTP-Posting-Host: 225.cambridge-2.ma.dial-access.att.net
X-No-Archive: Yes

On Sat, 26 Oct 1996 10:38:11 +0200, sebastien <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>Hello, thanks to read me. I'm HB9ICC, Sebastien in Geneva.
>
>I'm looking for a program to calculate a parabola-antenna.
>
>If you have this program, please contact me or send me a copy into my
>
>E-Mail.
>
>Thanks in advance and very Best 73's.
>
>HB9ICC, Sebastien .
>
>E-Mail:    [e-mail]

Here's a program from Scientific Atlanta, I got from a "QRZ!" Ham
Radio CDROM.


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:14 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!netnews.mis.net!news
From: "Joseph G. Hill" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Looking for Cushcraft R5 vertical.
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 07:53:44 -0500
Organization: mis.net
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: loukyts13.mis.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b7 (Win95; I)

Looking for Cushcraft R5 vertical.


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:15 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!aanews.merit.net!monroe.lib.mi.us!news
From: Dan Metzger <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Measuring impedance of ground on 160
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 11:13:53 +0000
Organization: Monroe County Library
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm159-05.dialip.mich.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Macintosh; I; 68K)

My neighborhood lot restricts me to small antennas, so I tried loading
my 40 meter dipole (center and braid tied together) as a long wire
with an MFJ versatuner II on 160 meters. It loads, but I think that
thing would load a straightened hairpin. Signal reports are poor.

My ground at present is simply the cold water pipe.  Here is the
question: How can I determine whether it would be worth a lot of
trouble to bury a bunch of ground radials?  Can I measure my ground
resistance somehow with common instruments? (I'm too cheap to buy an
antenna analyzer.)

The soil here is sand. I drove a 10-ft ground rod in and measured
1 k-ohm dc from the ground rod to the water pipe!  After a few gallons
of salt water, it went down to 500 ohms.  This is obviously
ridiculous, but what should be the resistance between two "good
grounds"?

And, BTW, what is the ground resistance between America and Europe?
Did they use that as one of the conductors for the early translantic
cables?  (just curious on this last - I'm not thinking of running a
transatlantic cable, but I would like to work 160 meters.)

Thanks, all - Dan, K8JWR  Lambertville, Michigan  11:00 Mon 28 Oct


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:16 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-16.sprintlink.net!news-stock.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!uwm.edu!newsspool.doit.wisc.edu!news.doit.wisc.edu!news
From: Scott Ellington <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Measuring impedance of ground on 160
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 14:03:20 -0600
Organization: University of Wisconsin, Madison
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: snet47.ssec.wisc.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Macintosh; I; 68K)

Dan's (K8JWR) 40 M dipole and coax behaves like a top-loaded vertical on
160 when you feed it that way.  Assuming the coax is well under
a quarter wave long (170 feet), the feedpoint resistance will be
low, probably around 10 Ohms.  Like any ground-mounted vertical,
it needs radials.  I suggest attaching as many radials as you can
to the antenna tuner ground.  Don't worry if they aren't a quarter
wave, just make them as long as you can.   They don't have to be
straight.  A dozen or more is best, but even two will help.  Ground
rods or a water pipe ground is pretty worthless with this type
of antenna.

You can get an idea of the effect by measuring the SWR versus
frequency as you add radials.  Measure the bandwidth at, say, the
1.5:1 points, always re-tuning the antenna tuner at mid-range.
As you add radials, the bandwidth should DECREASE,
as the losses go down.  (The tuner may confuse things a bit, but
I think you'll still see a decrease in bandwidth.)  I this case,
small bandwidth is GOOD, because it means more power is being
radiated.  When adding more radials no longer reduces the bandwidth
significantly, you've reached the point of diminishing returns.  (When
the radials are short compared to a quarter wavelength, it doesn't
help much to have more than a dozen or so.)   The antenna will never
be very efficient, but the radials should make a big differences.

--
73,

Scott  K9MA
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:17 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!usc!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!fc.hp.com!news
From: "Dick Reeve(TEMP-Test Area Tech)" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: MFJ 1798
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 13:53:18 -0700
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpesdjr.fc.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 9000/715)

Does any comments on the MFJ 1798 Antenna?


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:18 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!fc.hp.com!news
From: "Dick Reeve(TEMP-Test Area Tech)" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: MFJ 1798 Antenna
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 16:03:29 -0600
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpesdjr.fc.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 9000/715)

I want to buy an HF antenna that can easily be setup in campgrounds,etc.
I would appreciate comments and or recomendations, I have been
considering Cushcraft's R7 and the MFJ 1798.
Thanks in advance.
Dick Reeve KB0WWA


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:18 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!altitude!usenet
From: Madjid VE2GMI <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: microstrip array antenna
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 11:18:47 -0400
Organization: ORION Microsystems
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dynamicppp-3.hip.cam.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)
To: amy musgrave <[e-mail]>

amy musgrave wrote:
>
> I am attempting to pursue commercialization of a superior manufacturing
> method for high performance circular polarization microstrip array
> antenna.  Where should I start my research?


The patent office is a good start

        http://www.uspto.gov/


-----------------------------
Madjid, VE2GMI - Home Page: http://www.CAM.ORG/~mboukri
NEC4WIN Antenna simulation for Windows


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:19 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!gatech!csulb.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news.ironhorse.com!op.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!news.wildstar.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.insinc.net!news2.insinc.net!pegasus.odyssee.net!news
From: "Boby" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: MIDLAND  VHF
Date: 24 Oct 1996 03:26:02 GMT
Organization: Odyssee Internet
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <01bbc15b$3b931420$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pool21-9.odyssee.net
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

I need to reprogram a MIDLAND VHF radio..  I need the program and the Cable
Specs..

Anyone can help me?


the radios are   70-1336A  and 70-3500B


thanks


John


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:21 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.fibr.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!ratty.wolfe.net!usenet
From: Ramon Gandia <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Mobile UHF antennae
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 03:15:40 -0800
Organization: Anvil Technology
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: nome-ts1-p01.nome.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Malcolm Larkin wrote:
>
> I am placing this question here are it relates to a band not far from
> 70cm.
>
> I am looking for design ideas for omidirection mobile antennae for UHF
> (477 MHz to be exact - This is a CB band in Australia) At the moment I
> am using 1/4 on ground plane, Well thats what I started with but to get
> the swr down to 1.2:1 the 1/4 is about 80mm instead of about 150mm. If
> anyone has ideas on impedence matching mobile antennae up in this part
> of the spectrum, I appreciate the advice.


80 mm is too short, the 150 mm is correct.  If you are getting
such a short whip, something is wrong with the installation.

Are you on an all-matal roof in the vehicle?  Is the antenna
base well grounded to the rooof?  Is the coax cable still
attached to the base?

Reason I ask is people often put antennas on vinyl roofs,
or other non metallic ones.  Some of the antenna bases do not
grip too well and when you tighten the wrenches the base spins
and breaks the cable right there where you can't see it,
between the roof and headliner.  Check this all out.

I have over 30 vehicles of 452 mHz and have never seen this
unless there is something broken, or somehow insulated from
grounding.
--
In order to foil SpamBots, my e-mail address is not
machine readable.  Please reply to address below:

Ramon Gandia,    Nome, Alaska  |    rfg.at.nome.dot.net
AL7X          S/V Seven Stars  |
907-443-2437 fax [phone]  | where at=@  dot=period


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:22 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!hammer.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!kaiwan.kaiwan.com!grinder!darryl.linkow
From: [e-mail] (DARRYL LINKOW)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Mods wanted for Standard
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 96 22:31:00 -0800
Distribution: world
Organization: The Grinder_Simi Valley,CA_805-583-5833
Reply-To: [e-mail] (DARRYL LINKOW)
X-Newsreader: PCBoard Version 15.22
X-Mailer: PCBoard/UUOUT Version 1.20
Lines: 6


Anyone have any mods for the Standard C5900DA tri-bander?  If so,
please post here or Email me.  73, Darryl KE6IHA

---
 * OLX 2.2 * Darryl Linkow [phone]  9 am - 5 pm PDT


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:23 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!szdc!news
From: "J.L. Smith" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: need a directional antenna.
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 14:29:29 -0500
Organization: BUSINESS SERVICES UNLIMITED
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <01bbc04f.5835f0a0$507475ce@default>
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1080

I need some info about directional antennas.  I transmit on freq. from
27mhz.  on up to 49 mhz.  with only 5 watts of power. if anyone has any
information please e-mail me at [e-mail]

                                                                Thank you



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:24 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: need a directional antenna.
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 20:18:27 -0700
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbc04f.5835f0a0$507475ce@default>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

J.L. Smith wrote:
>
> I need some info about directional antennas.  I transmit on freq. from
> 27mhz.  on up to 49 mhz.  with only 5 watts of power. if anyone has any
> information please e-mail me at [e-mail]
>
>                                                                 Thank you
>


altavoz: 3 , Phased verticals. "Amatuer radio vertical antenna
handbook" Paul H. Lee , N6PL about 120 pages of great tutorial
at about $10




______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:24 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!tijc02!ingrer
From: [e-mail] (Ed Ingraham         )
Subject: Re: Need Help Looking For A Doppler
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Siemens Industrial Automation, Johnson City TN
References: <548g6n$[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 96 17:43:09 GMT
Lines: 5

From article <548g6n$[e-mail]>, by [e-mail] (Ken Thom
pson):
> please post plans for a doppler scanner antenna!!???!
>
>
Check out http://members.aol.com/homingin/index.html


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:25 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!news.magicnet.net!nntp.newsfirst.com!nntp.crosslink.net!munnari.OZ.AU!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Need Help Looking For A Doppler
Date: 23 Oct 96 00:45:05 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
<< In article <548g6n$[e-mail]>, Ken Thompson
 <[e-mail]> writes
 >please post plans for a doppler scanner antenna!!???!
 >
 >
 Get a copy of a US book
 Transmitter Hunting - Radio Direction Finding Simplified
 by Joseph D Moell and Thomas N Curlee
 ISBN 0/8306/2701/4
  >>
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Another good source of info of this sort is the Fox-List list.  I don't have
subscription information in front of me, but check out the following WEB
sight
  HTTP://WWW.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU/~FUAT/CUARC/MAILING-LISTS.HTML

This will give you a list of lists, including this one.

The Fox-List is a great place for doppler or any direction finding questions.


Bob
KD8WU


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:26 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.csranet.com!usenet
From: Hal Rosser AE4YN <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.swap
Subject: need MFJ941C MANUAL
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 11:05:28 -0700
Organization: CSRA Internet Services
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: line079.csranet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30398 rec.radio.amateur.misc:116946 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41152 rec.radio.swap:92347

Does anyone know where I can get a manual for
a MFJ 941-C ant tuner ?
--
Thanks in advance
AE4YN Hal
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:27 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.syrres.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-16.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!mr.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!news-out.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!news-admin
From: "Bob Smith" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.space
Subject: New 'N' Connectors OK?
Date: 28 Oct 1996 15:34:53 GMT
Organization: InternetMCI
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <01bbc4e5$8f923820$aaecbdcc@rsmith>
NNTP-Posting-Host: infolink-204.189.236.170.chicago.mci.net
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30578 rec.radio.amateur.space:8663

Are those new N connectors that look like PL259's OK.  I have a few and
they pretty easy to work with.  But then again the standard ones now seem
just as easy to use.

Thanks and 73 de Bob.



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:28 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.callamer.com!spork.callamer.com!cbuttsch
From: Clifford Buttschardt <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.space
Subject: Re: New 'N' Connectors OK?
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 13:05:42 -0800
Organization: Call America Internet Services  [phone]
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbc4e5$8f923820$aaecbdcc@rsmith>
NNTP-Posting-Host: spork.callamer.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Sender: [e-mail]
To: Bob Smith <[e-mail]>
In-Reply-To: <01bbc4e5$8f923820$aaecbdcc@rsmith>
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30687 rec.radio.amateur.space:8675

When you get some answers on this would you be sure and post it?  I think
there are many of us that would like to know your results.  Cliff K7RR


On 28 Oct 1996, Bob Smith wrote:

> Are those new N connectors that look like PL259's OK.  I have a few and
> they pretty easy to work with.  But then again the standard ones now seem
> just as easy to use.
>
> Thanks and 73 de Bob.
>
>
>



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:28 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!shore!mv!wd1v.mv.com!user
From: [e-mail] (John D. Seney, WD1V,   LeCroy T&M   800.553.2769)
Subject: New Ham Radio FAQ
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: MV Communications, Inc.
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 10:35:33 GMT
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: wd1v.mv.com
Lines: 23

                  Announcing NEW Ham Radio.FAQ

This file started as a regular USENET posting called "rec.radio.amateur
.misc Frequently Asked Questions".

The evolving file was distributed far and wide thanks to passionate
contributors. The file was abandoned in 1994 and has been resurrected
now on the WWW for currency and convenience.

Ham Radio.FAQ contains 3 chapters and many, many links to radio
related sites!

1 - Introduction to the Ham Radio.FAQ
2 - Amateur Radio Organizations, Services, and Data Sources
3 - Amateur Radio Advanced and Technical Questions

Please provide a copy of the Ham Radio.FAQ to any new or soon-to-be Hams
that you know or share with them the URL to this site:

              http://www.mv.com/ipusers/wd1v

John D. Seney
http://www.mv.com/ipusers/wd1v


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:29 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!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: sci.electronics.design,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.aviation.products,rec.aviation.homebuilt,alt.radio.pirate
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: 22 Oct 1996 09:37:56 GMT
Organization: SunSoft South, Los Angeles, CA
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <54i4lk$[e-mail]>
References: <54bus9$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54g8rk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sunspot.west.sun.com
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.electronics.design:23560 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30295 rec.aviation.products:11117 rec.aviation.homebuilt:42368 alt.radio.pirate:20401

In article <54g8rk$[e-mail]>, Jim Weir <[e-mail]> wrote:
>altavoz <[e-mail]> shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:
>
>->Jim Weir wrote:
>->>
>->> The Vertical Dipole we've been developing for over a year has been
>released
>
>->altavoz : If it's a "J" pole , forget it . The pattern sucks on
>->a jpole .
>
>A.  With the rather detailed physical description I gave I doubt anybody
>would mistake the dipole for a j-pole.
>
>B.  Even if I hadn't given the physical description, calling a j-pole,
>which is a 3/4 wavelength antenna with a 1/4 w. matching section a dipole
>stretches the definition beyond the elastic limit.

Slow down... a J-pole is not a 3/4 wave antenna.  It is a 1/2 wave antenna
with a 1/4 wave matching section.  Ideally, the matching section doesn't
radiate, and the antenna performance is identical to a 1/2 wave dipole
oriented vertically and fed in the center.

>C.  Why don't you educate us on your beliefs of the radiation pattern of
>the j-pole?  I'm sure that we would find the description ... ummm ...
>interesting.  I've spent a few years designing and investigating the
>patterns of j-poles on the antenna range here and I'd certainly be
>interested to see your engineering results.

J-poles often have strange radiation patterns becuase the feedline
isn't sufficiently decoupled from the matching stub.


--
 * 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] Wed Oct 30 06:21:31 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!oronet!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jim Weir)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.aviation.products,rec.aviation.homebuilt,alt.radio.pirate
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 16:35:45 GMT
Organization: RST Engineering
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <54g8rk$[e-mail]>
References: <54bus9$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: rst-engr.oro.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.electronics.design:23607 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30318 rec.aviation.products:11123 rec.aviation.homebuilt:42396 alt.radio.pirate:20410

altavoz <[e-mail]> shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:

->Jim Weir wrote:
->>
->> The Vertical Dipole we've been developing for over a year has been
released

->altavoz : If it's a "J" pole , forget it . The pattern sucks on
->a jpole .

A.  With the rather detailed physical description I gave I doubt anybody
would mistake the dipole for a j-pole.

B.  Even if I hadn't given the physical description, calling a j-pole,
which is a 3/4 wavelength antenna with a 1/4 w. matching section a dipole
stretches the definition beyond the elastic limit.

C.  Why don't you educate us on your beliefs of the radiation pattern of
the j-pole?  I'm sure that we would find the description ... ummm ...
interesting.  I've spent a few years designing and investigating the
patterns of j-poles on the antenna range here and I'd certainly be
interested to see your engineering results.

Jim

Jim Weir VP Engineering | You bet your sweet patootie I speak for the
RST Engineering         | company.  If I don't, ain't nobody gonna.
Grass Valley CA 95945   |
http://www.rst-engr.com | AR Adv WB6BHI--FCC 1st phone---Cessna 182A N73CQ
[e-mail]        | Commercial/CFI-Airplane/Glider-A&P-FAA Counselor



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:32 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!oronet!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jim Weir)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.aviation.products,rec.aviation.homebuilt,alt.radio.pirate
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 21:48:24 GMT
Organization: RST Engineering
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <54jfie$[e-mail]>
References: <54bus9$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54g8rk$[e-mail]> <54i4lk$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: rst-engr.oro.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.electronics.design:23649 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30331 rec.aviation.products:11134 rec.aviation.homebuilt:42425 alt.radio.pirate:20429

[e-mail] (Dana Myers) shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:

->Slow down... a J-pole is not a 3/4 wave antenna.  It is a 1/2 wave
antenna
->with a 1/4 wave matching section.  Ideally, the matching section doesn't
->radiate, and the antenna performance is identical to a 1/2 wave dipole
->oriented vertically and fed in the center.

Oh, no sir. Oh no, Oh No, OH NO.  The J-pole is a 3/4 wave radiating
element with a 1/4 wave matching element.  If you've been making them in
1/2 wave length, I don't DOUBT that you are getting radiation off the
feedline.  See for further information MOST of the ARRL publications with
the exception of the one that TELLS you to make it 1/2 wavelength long but
if you look and scale the picture, they made it 3/4 wavelength long.

See, for example, either Kraus or Jasik as an excellent antenna reference.

->J-poles often have strange radiation patterns becuase the feedline
->isn't sufficiently decoupled from the matching stub.

Yeah, when they are made 1/2 wavelength long, I wouldn't doubt it.  Tell
you what.  Come on over to my pattern range and if you can affect the
pattern of my j-pole design by more than 0.5 dB by any combination of
hands, aluminum foil, or other radiation modifiers on the feedline I'll
publish a public retraction AND buy you the best hamburger in town.  If you
can't, you buy me the beef AND take down the antenna testing setup.

Jim


Jim Weir VP Engineering | You bet your sweet patootie I speak for the
RST Engineering         | company.  If I don't, ain't nobody gonna.
Grass Valley CA 95945   |
http://www.rst-engr.com | AR Adv WB6BHI--FCC 1st phone---Cessna 182A N73CQ
[e-mail]        | Commercial/CFI-Airplane/Glider-A&P-FAA Counselor



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:33 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!oronet!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jim Weir)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.aviation.products,rec.aviation.homebuilt,alt.radio.pirate
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 15:30:48 GMT
Organization: RST Engineering
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <54ldq3$[e-mail]>
References: <54bus9$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54g8rk$[e-mail]> <54i4lk$[e-mail]> <54jfie$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: rst-engr.oro.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.electronics.design:23674 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30345 rec.aviation.products:11140 rec.aviation.homebuilt:42437 alt.radio.pirate:20438

[e-mail] (Richard Riley) shared these priceless pearls
of wisdom:


->In my infinite electromagnetic ignorance, I must ask --

In my infinite electromagnetic ignorance I must answer --

You ask if the j-pole will do anything for us "airplane folks".  I answer
in all honesty, no, not in the airplane.  It is 1.5 times as long as a
standard dipole and has the same gain.  It has a slightly narrower
bandwidth and is somewhat harder to tune than a dipole.  It is more
expensive to manufacture and is somewhat more difficult to assemble.

Thus having completely destroyed the thing, I will tell you that for a BASE
STATION antenna (like at an FBO) where size means practically nothing,
where you are only trying to cover a relatively narrow range of
frequencies, and where stability and ruggedness are of paramount
importance, there is no better choice, in my ususally-not-so-humble
opinion.

It is a totally grounded design for lightning, it is built like the
proverbial rock potty, it can be built out of anything from TV twinlead to
one-inch copper plumbing pipe, and it is relatively immune to attacks by
the environment, rain, squirrels, and all the rest.

I'm sure there will be other opinions...there always are.

Jim

Jim Weir VP Engineering | You bet your sweet patootie I speak for the
RST Engineering         | company.  If I don't, ain't nobody gonna.
Grass Valley CA 95945   |
http://www.rst-engr.com | AR Adv WB6BHI--FCC 1st phone---Cessna 182A N73CQ
[e-mail]        | Commercial/CFI-Airplane/Glider-A&P-FAA Counselor



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:35 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!oronet!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jim Weir)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.aviation.products,rec.aviation.homebuilt,alt.radio.pirate
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 15:30:51 GMT
Organization: RST Engineering
Lines: 59
Message-ID: <54ldq7$[e-mail]>
References: <54bus9$[e-mail]> <54g8rk$[e-mail]> <54i4lk$[e-mail]> <54jfie$[e-mail]> <54kkj8$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: rst-engr.oro.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.electronics.design:23676 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30347 rec.aviation.products:11141 rec.aviation.homebuilt:42438 alt.radio.pirate:20439

[e-mail] (Dana Myers) shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:

->I may be wrong, but I believe this is how it works:

->     |
->     |
->     |   <- this part is the 1/2 wave radiator
->     |
->     | |
->     | | <- this part is the 1/4 wave stub
->      -

Then we are lost in a sea of semantics.  The part that you show as a "1/2
wave radiator" is in fact 3/4 wave long, isn't it?  That is, you say that
the TOP 1/2 wave is the radiator and the bottom 1/4 wave is the stub.  My
nomenclature says that the part on the RIGHT is a 1/4 wave stub and the
part on the LEFT is a 3/4 wave radiator.  I think we're saying the same
thing using different ways of saying it.

Having said that, I'll put in my 8% of two bits by saying that nothing
other than copper pipe and coax are needed to build this antenna.  A balun
and the technique of coming off at right angles aren't really necessary if
you use another feed technique.  Not only that, but feeding it from the
bottom with coax makes all the talk about "radiating feedlines" go away.

Using your glyph from above:


->     |
->     |
->     |          <- this part is the 1/2 wave radiator
->     |
->     | |
->    x|_|y       <- this part is the 1/4 wave stub
->     |
       |
       z

You will note I've added four things near the base of the antenna.  One is
a shorting bar (_) across the bottom of the elements. Two more are the feed
points x and y.  And I've added an extension to the bottom of the thing,
not for any electrical purpose, but to make it easier to fasten it to the
antenna mount.

Now I'm presuming that we are making this thing out of copper pipe.  The
drill is to bring the coax into the bottom of the pipe at z, drill a hole
at x, and fasten the center conductor at y (the dimensions of x and y are
on my website).  The braid gets soldered at x.

That's my story and I'm stickin' to it.

Jim

Jim Weir VP Engineering | You bet your sweet patootie I speak for the
RST Engineering         | company.  If I don't, ain't nobody gonna.
Grass Valley CA 95945   |
http://www.rst-engr.com | AR Adv WB6BHI--FCC 1st phone---Cessna 182A N73CQ
[e-mail]        | Commercial/CFI-Airplane/Glider-A&P-FAA Counselor



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:37 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: 23 Oct 1996 11:40:25 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 69
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54le99$[e-mail]>
References: <54kokk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <54kkj8$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dana
Myers) writes:

>How exactly am I confused?

You don't appear to be confused Dana, but you may be wasting time. Arguing
this J-pole thing is like arguing religion. It's a simple antenna, and
often the first antenna people build. Once the SWR meter reads low and
they kerchunk a repeater and it beeps, they feel enlightened enough to
declare themselves EM wave theory and electromagnetic radiator Physicists.
I'm waiting to see someone do his Dotorates thesis on a J-pole!

Putting aside all the meaningless feather preening, when we look at the
J-pole its simply what Dana said, an end-fed 1/2 wl radiator worked
against a 1/4 wl stub.
The problem with the J-pole is the end fed 1/2 wl radiator has finite end
impedance, and it is fed with a balanced open stub.

The only way the half wave could have an infinite end impedance is if it
did not radiate, and had no loss. So we know the end impedance is finite,
and we know from treating the radiator as a transmission line with
distributed "loss" and a characteristic surge impedance (ratio of L to C
along its' length) what the end impedance is. Depending on the surge
impedance of the half wave section, the end impedance can range from a few
hundred ohms to a few thousand ohms. Now that you can find in Kraus,
Jasik, Jordon, and many others.

The J-pole itself, you won't.

Now we connect this finite impedance to this:

   a --------------------------c
   b --------------------------d

We short (or feed) a and b, and connect the antenna to c.

The problem is the antenna loads c with a 300-3000 ohm resistance, and
NOTHING returns to d.  There is nothing to created equal and opposite
current in the path from b to d, as exists in the path from a to c. This
causes common mode excitation of the stub, and ANYTHING conductive
connected to the stub.

The stub radiates, and the radiation of the stub depends on the ratio of
stub common mode impedance to halfwave antenna impedance at points c and
d. If points a and b are "grounded", it is the worse possible condition.

The J-pole is a poor antenna, because it depends heavily on the isolation
of a and b from "ground", and the effective diameter of the stub and
radiator control the pattern.

That's exactly why you WON'T find the J-pole in engineering texts, it's a
Ham antenna. Ham antennas are esoteric, and don't need to be engineered.
They can have all kinds of pattern distortion and loss, and people will
love 'em. All a VHF antenna needs to do is make that repeater go kerchunk
and have "low SWRs" and the study guide experts are all as happy as pigs
in electromagnetic slop.

But you can't BUY a J-pole from Phelps Dodge to put on that repeater, can
you? Small wonder, they don't sell unpredictable low gain antennas. You
won't find one in a real engineering book either, because they can't
analyze an unpreditable mass of plumbing.

I measured about 10 dB of J-pole FS change as the ground was varied at the
bottom of the stub, and that was on a test range. As I said earlier,
anyone with a J-pole and a battery powered antenna analyzer can see the
effects of current on the stub. It's so severe, it shows up as a SWR
change when you get your HAND near the antenna's "cold" base.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:38 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!scnews.sc.intel.com!itnews.sc.intel.com!chnews!ornews.intel.com!news
From: scott rider <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.aviation.products,rec.aviation.homebuilt,alt.radio.pirate
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: 23 Oct 1996 15:48:31 GMT
Organization: Intel Technical Marketing
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <54leof$[e-mail]>
References: <54bus9$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54g8rk$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54k7fj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: srider.hf.intel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2N (Windows; I; 16bit)
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.electronics.design:23688 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30355 rec.aviation.products:11142 rec.aviation.homebuilt:42448 alt.radio.pirate:20441

[e-mail] (Jim Weir) wrote:
>altavoz <[e-mail]> shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:

>->altavoz : Then why didnt you quote it?
>I did.  Why didn't you read it?

Jim, Why waste your time? He/She has nothing to offer, only baiting you into
a waste of bits...

>->altavoz : I did an eval on the J pole and found it had a pattern
>->like a 1/4w with 90 deg radials . If you'd like to know how it
>->radiates i suggest you do an evaluation . Good luck.

Jim, can you read between the lines? Sounds like a highschool project he/she d
id
with a few friends.

>->  Rather than educate you on a loser,

Education? I wasn't asking. I build J-Poles with twin lead and suction cups fo
r
ham radios as a pocket antenna where they have  much better characteristics
than the rubber duckie on my handheld. Would "altavoz" like a definiton of
a rubber duck? I can help with the education if needed. Sesame Street has a
song about one, but that is a different duck. Anything else you need to know?

>
>->I am an advanced class ham .
>

To think I missed my Extra because of one error the last time I took the code
test.
Otherwise I could "pull rank". Shoot. I don't have a license that says I am sm
arter.

I wonder if 5 years of Eng school and 15 years in industry might make up for t
he
difference?

Jim, you and I will have to try harder.
>

Scott Rider,  KC7IQR, CSEL-CFI, EAA chapter 105 VP.
[e-mail]  iEARS

Not my companies opinion.


* This will be the only cross-post to all the radio newsgroups. Otherwwise, fi
nd me
in R.A.H




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:39 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.pitt.edu!szekeres
From: [e-mail] (Greg J Szekeres)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.aviation.products,rec.aviation.homebuilt,alt.radio.pirate
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: 23 Oct 1996 16:32:27 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <54lhar$[e-mail]>
References: <54bus9$[e-mail]> <54i4lk$[e-mail]> <54jfie$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: unixs2.cis.pitt.edu
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.electronics.design:23697 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30361 rec.aviation.products:11143 rec.aviation.homebuilt:42455 alt.radio.pirate:20444

In article <[e-mail]>,
Richard Riley <[e-mail]> wrote:
 >On Tue, 22 Oct 1996 21:48:24 GMT, [e-mail] (Jim Weir) held
 >forth thus:
 >
 >(lots of snips)
 >
 >>Oh, no sir. Oh no, Oh No, OH NO.  The J-pole is a 3/4 wave radiating
 >>element with a 1/4 wave matching element.  If you've been making them
 in
 >>1/2 wave length, I don't DOUBT that you are getting radiation off the
 >>feedline.  See for further information MOST of the ARRL publications
 with
 >>the exception of the one that TELLS you to make it 1/2 wavelength long
 but
 >>if you look and scale the picture, they made it 3/4 wavelength long.
 >>
 >>See, for example, either Kraus or Jasik as an excellent antenna
 reference.
 >
 >In my infinite electromagnetic ignorance, I must ask --
 >
 >Is there anything about the J-pole that would make it a useful
 >configuration for homebuilts? Shorter than the dipole, maybe?  Or is
 >it just another possible configuration, with no real advantage for us
 >airplane folk?

You allready know its 3/4 wave not a 1/2 wave dipole. Its omni,
has gain, is grounded, is easy to make,.... Can also
make an excellant FM radio antenna.

greg

http://www.pitt.edu/~szekeres





From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:41 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.aviation.products,rec.aviation.homebuilt,alt.radio.pirate
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 20:14:43 -0700
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54bus9$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54g8rk$[e-mail]> <54i4lk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 241.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.electronics.design:23715 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30366 rec.aviation.products:11146 rec.aviation.homebuilt:42467 alt.radio.pirate:20450

Dana Myers wrote:
>
> In article <54g8rk$[e-mail]>, Jim Weir <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >altavoz <[e-mail]> shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:
> >
> >->Jim Weir wrote:
> >->>
> >->> The Vertical Dipole we've been developing for over a year has been
> >released
> >
> >->altavoz : If it's a "J" pole , forget it . The pattern sucks on
> >->a jpole .
> >
> >A.  With the rather detailed physical description I gave I doubt anybody
> >would mistake the dipole for a j-pole.
> >
> >B.  Even if I hadn't given the physical description, calling a j-pole,
> >which is a 3/4 wavelength antenna with a 1/4 w. matching section a dipole
> >stretches the definition beyond the elastic limit.
>
> Slow down... a J-pole is not a 3/4 wave antenna.  It is a 1/2 wave antenna
> with a 1/4 wave matching section.  Ideally, the matching section doesn't
> radiate, and the antenna performance is identical to a 1/2 wave dipole
> oriented vertically and fed in the center.
>
> >C.  Why don't you educate us on your beliefs of the radiation pattern of
> >the j-pole?  I'm sure that we would find the description ... ummm ...
> >interesting.  I've spent a few years designing and investigating the
> >patterns of j-poles on the antenna range here and I'd certainly be
> >interested to see your engineering results.
>
> J-poles often have strange radiation patterns becuase the feedline
> isn't sufficiently decoupled from the matching stub.
>
> --
>  * 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.          *




altavoz : show me.

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:42 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.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: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: 22 Oct 1996 19:51:38 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 60
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54jmma$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <54i4lk$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dana
Myers) writes:

>
>Slow down... a J-pole is not a 3/4 wave antenna.  It is a 1/2 wave
antenna
>with a 1/4 wave matching section.  Ideally, the matching section doesn't
>radiate, and the antenna performance is identical to a 1/2 wave dipole
>oriented vertically and fed in the center.
>
>>C.  Why don't you educate us on your beliefs of the radiation pattern of
>>the j-pole?  I'm sure that we would find the description ... ummm ...
>>interesting.  I've spent a few years designing and investigating the
>>patterns of j-poles on the antenna range here and I'd certainly be
>>interested to see your engineering results.
>
>J-poles often have strange radiation patterns becuase the feedline
>isn't sufficiently decoupled from the matching stub.

Dana's exactly correct. J-pole have very unpredictable patterns, the worse
pattern occuring when the bottom end of the stub is connected to a low RF
impedance mass.

A J-pole is a quarter wave stub feeding a half wave end fed antenna. The
end impedance of the half wave is NOT by any stretch of the imagination
infinite, it can range from a few hundred to a few thousand ohms depending
on the length to diameter ratio.

The fact the end fed half wave does not present infinite impedance to the
stub excites common mode currents on the stub that are out of phase with
the half wave section.

If the bottom of the stub is grounded, the top of the stub has a high
impedance and common mode current divides more evenly between the radiator
and the stub. This also produces maximum common mode current at the bottom
of the stub, and the largest pattern distortion.

Anyone that thinks a J-pole is a good ground independent antenna with a
clean pattern doesn't understand antennas well. Statements that J-poles
produce clean and predictable patterns are simply false.

Thios can be proven with a simple test. Take any J pole, place a battery
powered SWR analyzer directy at the base of the stub, and conncet it to
the feedline terminals with no excess coax.  Measure the SWR.

Now connect 1/4 wl of wire to the case of the analyzer, or the area of the
stub you would "ground". You'll see a very large SWR change. That SWR
change is from the common mode currents, and these currents will distort
the pattern.

With such a simple antenna, there's no reason for "experts", let alone the
general population, to be so misinformed. By the way, on a test range
measurement here, the field strength at zero degree take off angle varied
almost ten dB by changing the grounding at the base of the stub, or by
moving the feedline. If you want to talk to repeaters or earth based
stations, a J-pole grounded at the bottom is a worse than a 1/4 wl Gp.

You're right on target Dana.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:44 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.aviation.products,rec.aviation.homebuilt,alt.radio.pirate
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 23:44:39 -0700
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54bus9$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54g8rk$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54k7fj$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 116.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.electronics.design:23744 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30386 rec.aviation.products:11152 rec.aviation.homebuilt:42485 alt.radio.pirate:20459

altavoz Wrong. a J pole is not a 3/4 wave. Its a 5/8 .

Jim: nobody in their
right engineering minds would ever call the jpole a 5/8.  You are just
plain wrong.

altavoz : How plain wrong ?

altavoz : I did an eval on the J pole and found it had a pattern
like a 1/4w with 90 deg radials . If you'd like to know how it
radiates i suggest you do an evaluation . Good luck.


 Find a decent pattern range, find the <CAPS> symbol on your keyboard, and
 find some time to do the test right.

altavoz : YOU F' LOSER , I DID DO IT RIGHT !

Jim: Try working your way
 through engineering school at a company that required you to install
 antennas, then spend ten years on the engineeering pattern range for a
 major manufacturer of antennas, then almost thirty years in the antenna
 design field, being paid daily for your expertise.  You can fool some of
 the people...

 Oh, advanced class ham, first phone FCC, BS Physics, and national editor of
 a technical journal...

altavoz :  WOW , able to leap buildings in a single bound !
stops speeding locomotives ...  you're on drugs !

There is no such thing as a 1st phone , I know cause
i had a "P1"

You have failed to consider the need in antennas of a proper
ground radial sys' . The J pole has a bad ground radial sys' .
 You are an idiot.


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:45 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.aviation.products,rec.aviation.homebuilt,alt.radio.pirate
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 00:00:36 -0700
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54bus9$[e-mail]> <54g8rk$[e-mail]> <54i4lk$[e-mail]> <54jfie$[e-mail]> <54kkj8$[e-mail]> <54ldq7$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 116.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.electronics.design:23748 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30388 rec.aviation.products:11153 rec.aviation.homebuilt:42488 alt.radio.pirate:20460

> Jim Weir VP Disneyland  | You bet your sweet patootie I speak for the
> RST Engineering         | company.  If I don't, ain't nobody gonna.
> Grass Valley CA 95945   |
> http://www.rst-engr.com | AR Adv WB6BHI--FCC 1st phone---Cessna 182A N73CQ
> [e-mail]        | Commercial/CFI-Airplane/Glider-A&P-FAA Counselor




altavoz : With the same copper , i'll build a 5/8 w vert
similar to a Ringo and get better gain than your J pole .
Why are you lunnys so religously attached to this antenna?
It cant compete . Thats why they dont do it commercially .
  You are more fanatical than shite muslims .

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:46 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.aviation.products,rec.aviation.homebuilt,alt.radio.pirate
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 00:07:33 -0700
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54bus9$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54g8rk$[e-mail]> <54i4lk$[e-mail]> <54jfie$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54ldq3$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 116.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.electronics.design:23749 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30389 rec.aviation.products:11154 rec.aviation.homebuilt:42490 alt.radio.pirate:20461

Jim Weir wrote:
>
> [e-mail] (Richard Riley) shared these priceless pearls
> of wisdom:
>
> ->In my infinite electromagnetic ignorance, I must ask --
>
> In my infinite electromagnetic ignorance I must answer --
>
> You ask if the j-pole will do anything for us "airplane folks".  I answer
> in all honesty, no, not in the airplane.  It is 1.5 times as long as a
> standard dipole and has the same gain.  It has a slightly narrower
> bandwidth and is somewhat harder to tune than a dipole.  It is more
> expensive to manufacture and is somewhat more difficult to assemble.
>
> Thus having completely destroyed the thing, I will tell you that for a BASE
> STATION antenna (like at an FBO) where size means practically nothing,
> where you are only trying to cover a relatively narrow range of
> frequencies, and where stability and ruggedness are of paramount
> importance, there is no better choice, in my ususally-not-so-humble
> opinion.

altavoz : A 5/8 w vertical will kick its butt . ( higher gain)
The J pole has the gain of a 1/4 w . ( JUNK )

> It is a totally grounded design for lightning,

altavoz : lightning does not obey the E/R rule . It will travel
a higher resistance path just as often .


>it is built like the
> proverbial rock potty, it can be built out of anything from TV twinlead to
> one-inch copper plumbing pipe, and it is relatively immune to attacks by
> the environment, rain, squirrels, and all the rest.
> Jim


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:47 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!telepath!usenet
From: [e-mail] (brian whatcott)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.aviation.products,rec.aviation.homebuilt,alt.radio.pirate
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: 24 Oct 1996 16:36:34 GMT
Organization: Telepath
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <54o5ui$[e-mail]>
References: <54bus9$[e-mail]> <54g8rk$[e-mail]> <54i4lk$[e-mail]> <54jfie$[e-mail]> <54kkj8$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.228.199.37
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.7
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.electronics.design:23768 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30397 rec.aviation.products:11156 rec.aviation.homebuilt:42499 alt.radio.pirate:20466

In article <54kkj8$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
///
>I may be wrong, but I believe this is how it works:
>                                                 _
>     |                                          /  From here
>     |                                         /
>     |   <- this part is the 1/2 wave radiator \      to
>     |                                          \_    here. (bw)
>     | |
>     | | <- this part is the 1/4 wave stub
>      -
>
>The J-pole is an end-fed 1/2 wave radiator.  The feedpoint impedance
>is very high, so a shorted 1/4 wave stub is used as an impedance
>transformer.
>
>The couple of J-poles I built actually worked quite well.  I used
>a balun at the feedpoint and dressed the coax away from the section
>at a 90 degree angle.
>
>How exactly am I confused?
>
>--
> * Dana H. Myers

Your description is both theoretically coherent, and in accordance with
the list of dimensions given for Lee Aurick's 'J-fed 2 meter Vertical'
described in p11-24, ARRL Antenna Book, 14th Ed. 1984.

So I don't believe you are confused.
But then, I don't believe Jim is confused either.

 I THINK you got into a theological discussion concerning total
element lengths, and how much of that length actually radiates.

I would like to bet that Jim's budget antenna kit performs as
advertized, and it costs under $13 for goodness sake!

If  on the other hand, you suggested that Jim's technical debating mode
tends towards the dogmatic, then yes, oh yes, yes sir, I would tend to
agree.   <grin>

brian whatcott <[e-mail]>
Altus OK



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:48 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.aviation.products,rec.aviation.homebuilt,alt.radio.pirate
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 08:55:59 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54bus9$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54g8rk$[e-mail]> <54i4lk$[e-mail]> <54jfie$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.102.182
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.electronics.design:23780 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30405 rec.aviation.products:11158 rec.aviation.homebuilt:42510 alt.radio.pirate:20467

Jim Weir wrote:
> See for further information MOST of the ARRL publications with
> the exception of the one that TELLS you to make it 1/2 wavelength long but
> if you look and scale the picture, they made it 3/4 wavelength long.

"The J antenna is a mechanically modified version of the Zepp antenna.
It consists of a half-wavelength radiator fed by a quarter-wave
matching stub." Figure 35 agrees with this definition. from:
"The ARRL Antenna Book", 15th Edition, page 16-21

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


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:50 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.sgi.com!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz.cv.hp.com!tomb
From: [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: 24 Oct 1996 18:55:40 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard Corvallis Site
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <54oe3c$[e-mail]>
References: <54kokk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hplsnb.lsid.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL9.4]

W8JI  Tom ([e-mail]) wrote:
: In article <54jfie$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jim Weir) writes:

: >See, for example, either Kraus or Jasik as an excellent antenna
: reference.

: 3.) I looked through Kraus, Jasik, Jordan Bailman... no mention of a J
: pole or J antenna. What page is it on?

It's in King, Mimno and Wing, "Transmission Lines, Antennas and
Waveguides."  But that description predates, I believe, any
references to it as a "J-Pole."  It is described simply as an
end-fed half-wave.  King does a good job indicating the
importance of decoupling the feedline; in fact, this book is
one of the best I've seen in the area of feedline decoupling
discussions, and it's interesting to me to see how often this
subject comes up here considering how well understood it has
been in the past.

Keep the faith, Tom.  (As if I had any doubts...)

--
Cheers,
Tom
[e-mail]




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:52 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-4.sprintlink.net!tezcat!netaxs.com!feed1.news.erols.com!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!sunrise.gv.ssi1.com!oronet!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jim Weir)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.aviation.products,rec.aviation.homebuilt,alt.radio.pirate
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 16:28:33 GMT
Organization: RST Engineering
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <54qpus$[e-mail]>
References: <54bus9$[e-mail]> <54g8rk$[e-mail]> <54i4lk$[e-mail]> <54jfie$[e-mail]> <54kkj8$[e-mail]> <54o5ui$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: rst-engr.oro.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.electronics.design:23796 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30415 rec.aviation.products:11160 rec.aviation.homebuilt:42529 alt.radio.pirate:20471

[e-mail] (brian whatcott) shared these priceless pearls of
wisdom:
->If  on the other hand, you suggested that Jim's technical debating mode
->tends towards the dogmatic, then yes, oh yes, yes sir, I would tend to
->agree.   <grin>

Dogmatic?  DOGMATIC?  The only thing dogmatic around here is Pixie, the
Sheltie that has pups every six months like clockwork.

Hmph.  Dogmatic indeed.

{;-)

Jim
Jim Weir VP Engineering | You bet your sweet patootie I speak for the
RST Engineering         | company.  If I don't, ain't nobody gonna.
Grass Valley CA 95945   |
http://www.rst-engr.com | AR Adv WB6BHI--FCC 1st phone---Cessna 182A N73CQ
[e-mail]        | Commercial/CFI-Airplane/Glider-A&P-FAA Counselor



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:53 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!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] (JAMES MCEWEN)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: 25 Oct 96 22:54:41 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 65
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]



W8JI, Tom, writes:
                       **************

Now we connect this finite impedance to this:

   a --------------------------c
   b --------------------------d

We short (or feed) a and b, and connect the antenna to c.

The problem is the antenna loads c with a 300-3000 ohm resistance, and
NOTHING returns to d.  There is nothing to created equal and opposite
current in the path from b to d, as exists in the path from a to c. This
causes common mode excitation of the stub, and ANYTHING conductive
connected to the stub.

                 *********************

Tom, I don't dispute any of your statements, but isn't the stub supposed
to be tuned for the load at "C" and shorted at "A-B"?  We talk about 1/4
Wavelength (*L* = Lambda) for the stub, but it should be less then 1/4
*L* (electrical) because it is supposed to match the antenna load.
I know you understand the following, because you showed it to me, but
maybe it didn't come across to others out there.
    The problem with a lot of construction articles for the J-pole is the
author  comparing apples and oranges.  A formula that works for twinlead
does not work for copper pipe, and a formula for a 6 meter J-Pole with
twinlead does not work for a 440 J-Pole with twinlead.  Most of this is
because the "K"  factor, the effect of the antenna diameter to *L*.  At
440 MHz the diameter of 22-24 gauge wire becomes significant in computing
the length of a 1/2 *L* dipole, or a 1/4 *L* matching section.
     This K factor also affects the impedance of the 1/2 *L* section
(What you connect to "C" in the drawing above).  1/2 *L* Wire antennas at
the medium frequency range have about 5000 ohms impedance, at the feed
point, if operated over a perfect ground.  The same antenna will drop to
maybe 2000-3000 ohms at low VHF.  If you increase the diameter of the
wire (to small copper tubing), you drop to (a guess) maybe 1 K at 2 meter
frequencies and 500 ohms at 440.
     If you are making a J-Pole from twinlead and pulling it up to a tree
branch as a backpack antenna, then some of the magazine article formulas
work ok. But if you are putting the antenna inside a piece of plastic water
pipe, then that is another ball game and you have a lot of cut and try.
The same thing happens when you mount what is called the "cold end" of the
1/4 *L* section (the shorted "A-B" end in the dwg. above) to a conductive
antenna support.  The 1/4 *L* section becomes detuned and unbalanced. And
radiates.
     The 1/4 *L* section is an impedance transformer, matching the 50 ohm
coax to the (300 to 3000 ohm) impedance of the 1/2 *L* radiator.  It isn't
a very broad band device, and isn't shielded from outside influences.

  Now for my 2 cents worth.  Twinlead is convenient because a single piece
could be used for both the transformer and radiating element, and it could
be rolled up and stored in a backpack, and was lightweight but sturdy,this
made a good portable antenna but adapting this material to a fixed antenna
is probably not good engineering.
 The Handbook has designs for impedance matching transformers from coax
which will work with 1/2 *L* radiators.  I don't want to open the "dipole
needs a balun" thread again, but these are supposed to be shielded by the
braid on the coax.  They may be better for a fixed station which wants a
radiator but doesn't want to use a ground plane antenna.

Jim KA6TPR



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:55 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!netnews.fast.net!news.fast.net!netaxs.com!feed1.news.erols.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!enews.sgi.com!news.mathworks.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.aviation.products,rec.aviation.homebuilt,alt.radio.pirate
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 18:16:19 -0700
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54bus9$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54g8rk$[e-mail]> <54i4lk$[e-mail]> <54jfie$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 29.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.electronics.design:23917 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30505 rec.aviation.products:11172 rec.aviation.homebuilt:42619 alt.radio.pirate:20508

Cecil Moore wrote:
>
> Jim Weir wrote:
> > See for further information MOST of the ARRL publications with
> > the exception of the one that TELLS you to make it 1/2 wavelength long but
> > if you look and scale the picture, they made it 3/4 wavelength long.
>
> "The J antenna is a mechanically modified version of the Zepp antenna.
> It consists of a half-wavelength radiator fed by a quarter-wave
> matching stub." Figure 35 agrees with this definition. from:
> "The ARRL Antenna Book", 15th Edition, page 16-21
>
> 73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


altavoz: The problem here is the ARRL book. 17-5 shows a ZEPP.
The ARRL book is the worst piece of crap ever written.
ZEPP came from Zeppelin ( German airship) , an antenna trailed
out the rear of a Hydrogen Blimp ( Zeppelin). These were not
1/2 wave (2000+j0) , they were 5/8 w ( 200-j100) so they could
feed them with a normal size inductor.
  ARRL book confuses, it shows a 1/4 w dipole as a Zepp then
a 1/2 w dipole with only one side !! All fed with 200-600 ladder
line .
  A ZEPP IS A 5/8 WAVE , NOT A 1/2 WAVE.
A 5/8 w is not a ruler measured 5/8 w , its anything far enough
away from 1/2 w to be tuned with normal sized inductors ( but nowhere
near a 3/4 w) . So anything between 1/2 w anf 5/8 that is easy to
tune ( <200 ohms) is a 5/8 w.  I will also accept the word
"capacitive 1/2 w" cause very loosely ,that is a 5/8 w.
But one says "no , its not a 5/8 w , its a 1/2w then you better
find an EXTREMELY HIGH Z SOURCE TO DRIVE IT ( very difficult).



_____End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:56 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!telepath!usenet
From: [e-mail] (brian whatcott)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.aviation.products,rec.aviation.homebuilt,alt.radio.pirate
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: 26 Oct 1996 22:30:09 GMT
Organization: Telepath
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <54u3dh$[e-mail]>
References: <54bus9$[e-mail]> <54g8rk$[e-mail]> <54i4lk$[e-mail]> <54jfie$[e-mail]> <54kkj8$[e-mail]> <54o5ui$[e-mail]> <54qpus$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.228.199.48
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.7
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.electronics.design:23918 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30507 rec.aviation.products:11173 rec.aviation.homebuilt:42625 alt.radio.pirate:20510

In article <54qpus$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
...
>
>Dogmatic?  DOGMATIC?  The only thing dogmatic around here is Pixie,
>the Sheltie that has pups every six months like clockwork.
>
>Hmph.  Dogmatic indeed.
>
>{;-)
>
>Jim

Gotta give this animal the bird...
For sheer oviduct mass-flow and all round fecundity, you just
have to go with that well-known flying machine: the bantam.

Yeah, and my squawky is prolificker than your sheltie, any day!

(;-))

brian



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:57 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!newspump.sol.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 96 23:19:17 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54bus9$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54g8rk$[e-mail]> <54i4lk$[e-mail]> <54jfie$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1b.delphi.com
X-To: altavoz <[e-mail]>

altavoz <[e-mail]> writes:

>ZEPP came from Zeppelin ( German airship) , an antenna trailed
>out the rear of a Hydrogen Blimp ( Zeppelin). These were not
>1/2 wave (2000+j0) , they were 5/8 w ( 200-j100) so they could

Here is what I believe to be true. The original Zepp antenna
which trailed from the Zeppelins were 1/2 wavelength end-
fed antennas with a 1/4 wavelength matching balanced
section of transmission line to rotate the high resistance
halfway around the Smith chart to the low resistance
point.

An Extended Zepp is the same antenna with a 5/8 wavelength
antenna section and a slightly shorter matching section.

A Double Extended Zepp is a 10/8 physical dipole as
opposed to an electrical dipole.

73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:58 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,alt.radio.pirate
From: [e-mail] (J.S. Jenkins)
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Organization: Hyp-Mo-Tized
References: <54bus9$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54g8rk$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54k7fj$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: News Xpress 2.0 Beta #2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 96 00:04:44 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.22.166.204
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Lines: 36
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!news-w.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!news.icix.net!solomon.ij.net!jeffreyj
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30523 alt.radio.pirate:20522

In article <[e-mail]>, altavoz <[e-mail]
> wrote:
>altavoz Wrong. a J pole is not a 3/4 wave. Its a 5/8 .
>
>Jim: nobody in their
>right engineering minds would ever call the jpole a 5/8.  You are just
>plain wrong.
>
>altavoz : How plain wrong ?

Very plain wrong. Since you are reluctant to consider credentials in
evaluating another's argument, I will quote the ARRL Antenna Handbook
(ISBN 0-87259-473-4, p. 16-21), which as an advanced class ham you
ought to be familiar with:

"The J Antenna is a mechanically modified version of the Zepp
(Zeppelin) antenna. It consists of a _half wavelength_ [italics mine]
_radiator_ [ditto] fed by a quarter wavelength matching stub. This
antenna exhibits an _omnidirectional pattern_ [ditto] with little high
angle radiation, but does not require the _ground plane that 1/4-wave
and 5/8-wave antennas do to work properly_ [ditto]."

Translation: You are wrong.


>You have failed to consider the need in antennas of a proper
>ground radial sys' . The J pole has a bad ground radial sys' .
> You are an idiot.

See above.

There is a related antenna called the "Super J-pole" (ibid, p. 16-22)
but it is not 5/8-wave in any section as well.

Furthermore, this argument is stupid in that one may easily consult
several trusted references to find the answer. Arguments should be
conducted on topics of more subjective nature, not provable facts.


+                                                                     +
     "Today, then, as I have suitably freed my mind from all cares,
      and have secured for myself an assured leisure in peaceful
      solitude, I shall at last apply myself earnestly and freely
      to the general overthrow of all my former opinions."

+                                                  - Rene Descartes   +


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:21:59 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 12:09:57 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 61
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54kokk$[e-mail]> <54oe3c$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 185.los-angeles-007.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Tom Bruhns wrote:
>
> W8JI  Tom ([e-mail]) wrote:
> : In article <54jfie$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jim Weir) writes:
>
> : >See, for example, either Kraus or Jasik as an excellent antenna
> : reference.
>
> : 3.) I looked through Kraus, Jasik, Jordan Bailman... no mention of a J
> : pole or J antenna. What page is it on?
>
> It's in King, Mimno and Wing, "Transmission Lines, Antennas and
> Waveguides."  But that description predates, I believe, any
> references to it as a "J-Pole."  It is described simply as an
> end-fed half-wave.  King does a good job indicating the
> importance of decoupling the feedline; in fact, this book is
> one of the best I've seen in the area of feedline decoupling
> discussions, and it's interesting to me to see how often this
> subject comes up here considering how well understood it has
> been in the past.
>
> Keep the faith, Tom.  (As if I had any doubts...)
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Tom
> [e-mail]


altavoz: Read Paul H. Lee page 84 "Am' Rad' Vert' Ant' HB"
As he proves you must have a counterpoise for a 1/2w ant.
A J POLE DOESNT WORK ! IT HAS POOR LOW ANGLE RADIATION .
He says " Actualy the 5/8w vert is better than the 1/2
vert from the standpoints of low angle radiation and feedpoint
impedance.."



BTW for those who find traps confusing :
A trap is a tank circuit,
is a HAIR PIN,
is a 1/4w stub.

At their res freq ( hi Z ) they're equivalent.
But above freq , the tank goes Xc, hair pin and 1/4w stub
go into periodic phases ( 1/2w,1/4w,1/2w,1/4w....)
This 1/4w stub can be colinear ( J pole, Butternut
HF vert on 15 meters )or 90 degrees ( RINGO RANGER II)
 Look at the Butternut vert on 15 meters , the element
above this downward pointing "trap" is invisable cause
it is not a 1/2w . If it were 1/2w it would RADIATE !!
  Anything thats very hi Z put on top of a trap will
receive power thru the trap ! So the trap dont trap!!

So you can put a 1/2w on top of your J pole and it will
increase the gain , but you'll still have worse gain than
a RINGO RANGER II !

TRAPS DONT TRAP , TRAPS DONT TRAP ,......

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:00 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.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: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: 29 Oct 1996 01:23:18 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 22
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <5547sm$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

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

>
>altavoz: The problem here is the ARRL book. 17-5 shows a ZEPP.
>The ARRL book is the worst piece of crap ever written.
>ZEPP came from Zeppelin ( German airship) , an antenna trailed
>out the rear of a Hydrogen Blimp ( Zeppelin). These were not
>1/2 wave (2000+j0) , they were 5/8 w ( 200-j100) so they could
>feed them with a normal size inductor.

The ARRL Antenna Handbook is a very good book as long as you don't depend
on it for field theory. Once in a while something bad works it's way in,
but most of it is really good. All in all, it's probably the best book for
the layman or Ham.

If you want to see crap, you needn't look far. People are posting things
even though they obviously haven't the faintest clue how a transmission
line 1/4 wl stub works. They also seem to think the end impedance of a
half wave radiator is "infinite" and "the half wave needs no ground".

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:01 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 10:58:28 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 51
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54bus9$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54g8rk$[e-mail]> <54i4lk$[e-mail]> <54jfie$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 185.los-angeles-007.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Cecil Moore wrote:
>
> altavoz <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> >ZEPP came from Zeppelin ( German airship) , an antenna trailed
> >out the rear of a Hydrogen Blimp ( Zeppelin). These were not
> >1/2 wave (2000+j0) , they were 5/8 w ( 200-j100) so they could
>
> Here is what I believe to be true. The original Zepp antenna
> which trailed from the Zeppelins were 1/2 wavelength end-
> fed antennas with a 1/4 wavelength matching balanced
> section of transmission line to rotate the high resistance
> halfway around the Smith chart to the low resistance
> point.
>
> An Extended Zepp is the same antenna with a 5/8 wavelength
> antenna section and a slightly shorter matching section.
>
> A Double Extended Zepp is a 10/8 physical dipole as
> opposed to an electrical dipole.
>
> 73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC


altavoz: The reason is that they NOMINALLY called them 1/2w
but as we all know a 1/2w is very high Z and stretching it
a little dramatically lowers Z . So i think the Germans
said 1/2w and meant 5/8w ...NOMINAL
 This lengthening effect is much higher at the 1/2w
point than shorteneing a 1/4w , thats why i call 1/4w
ants low Q and 1/2w ( nominal) , high Q antennas.
  I find it strange that the J pole religious group dont
use radials and put the 1/4 stub horizontal...wait a minute!
thats allready been done , but in a horiz ant' .
  Balanced antennas using coax dont need baluns , they
need offset feeds, the pattern is not effected sig' .
  A trap is a tank circuit ( Paul H. Lee N6PL " Amt'
Rad' Vert' Ant' HB") therefore it simply inverts the
volt at the junction of the upper 1/2w section ( colinear).
on HF vert's this tank inverts the volt phase at res' and
below res , it adds inductance to the ant, above resonance
it adds capacitance. The cap hat above the trap improves
the trap action as the traps cap is a tube and this tube
couples very strongly with the cap hat .
  A 1/4w above the trap is not seen  cause it's low Z and
tank( trap) cant couple energy to a low Z only to a hi Z .




______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:02 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!news1.good.net!news.good.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!usc!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz.cv.hp.com!tomb
From: [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: 29 Oct 1996 17:57:13 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard Corvallis Site
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <555ghp$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hplsnb.lsid.hp.com

altavoz ([e-mail]) wrote:

: BTW for those who find traps confusing :
: A trap is a tank circuit,
: is a HAIR PIN,
: is a 1/4w stub.

: At their res freq ( hi Z ) they're equivalent.


No they are not.  See King, Minmo and Wing.  Model them.  Measure them.
The antenna field couples to a stub perpendicular to the antenna, but
not so significantly to a tank or a stub collinear with the antenna.

--
Cheers,
Tom
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:03 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 12:21:28 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <555ghp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 140.los-angeles-007.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Tom Bruhns wrote:
>
> altavoz ([e-mail]) wrote:
>
> : BTW for those who find traps confusing :
> : A trap is a tank circuit,
> : is a HAIR PIN,
> : is a 1/4w stub.
>
> : At their res freq ( hi Z ) they're equivalent.
>
> No they are not.  See King, Minmo and Wing.  Model them.  Measure them.
> The antenna field couples to a stub perpendicular to the antenna, but
> not so significantly to a tank or a stub collinear with the antenna.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Tom
> [e-mail]

altavoz: HOW SIGNIFICANTLY ? !! commercial makers use all !!
in many different flavors !!
BTW you'll get more credibility if you quote JASIK,BROWN and
the better knowns . ha ha ha ha h......
--

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:04 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 20:26:19 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <5547sm$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 144.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

W8JI Tom wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, altavoz
> <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> >
> >altavoz: The problem here is the ARRL book. 17-5 shows a ZEPP.
> >The ARRL book is the worst piece of crap ever written.
> >ZEPP came from Zeppelin ( German airship) , an antenna trailed
> >out the rear of a Hydrogen Blimp ( Zeppelin). These were not
> >1/2 wave (2000+j0) , they were 5/8 w ( 200-j100) so they could
> >feed them with a normal size inductor.
>
> The ARRL Antenna Handbook is a very good book as long as you don't depend
> on it for field theory. Once in a while something bad works it's way in,
> but most of it is really good. All in all, it's probably the best book for
> the layman or Ham.
>
> If you want to see crap, you needn't look far. People are posting things
> even though they obviously haven't the faintest clue how a transmission
> line 1/4 wl stub works. They also seem to think the end impedance of a
> half wave radiator is "infinite" and "the half wave needs no ground".
>
> 73 Tom


altavoz: Right.
.58w needs ground.
air is 377 ohms. .5wl open stub is low Z ( term=377ohms),
shorted 1/4wl stub is many times higher Z .

ARRL HB 17-14 s/b " The trap functions as an open circuit on the
antenna only if the section above it is not HI Z ( .5wl). If the
upper section is HI Z then power will be efficiently coupled to it
and the upper section will radiate with a current peak at that
upper elements center.



______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:05 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!btnet!btinternet!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jason Williams-Lock)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: open-wire feeders and radiation loss
Date: 27 Oct 1996 17:48:31 GMT
Organization: none
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <55079f$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: host-73-37-61.btinternet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.8 (16bit)

Hello all!

I am currently using 300-ohm twin ribbon feeder for an internal antenna
installation but I would like to go for an external antenna. Now apparently
300-ohm ribbon feeder does not like wet weather and the ribbon
dielectric absorbs moisture which increases the loss which I don't want
because I am interesting in v.h.f (Band II) dx.

I would therefore like to use open-wire transmission-line, perhaps either
300, 450 or 600 ohm open-wire feeder. The question is though does anyone know
about how far I can go with regards to the wire spacing, at v.h.f before I
start getting serious loss due to radiation from the line.

I would like to go for 300-ohm open-wire transmission-line or perhaps 450-ohm
(window) line which I have got, has anyone used or is using open-wire at
v.h.f for DX, or whatever, I *DO* want to use open-wire line, *NOT* coax, as
I don't like it because of it's losses, I just want an open-wire line that
will be able to cope with the weather, doesn't degrade and doesn't radiate
(or at least as possible).

Thanks for any advice you might be able to offer!

Regards,

Jason



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:06 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.mci.com!news-w.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!news.rrnet.com!usenet
From: Mike <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: parrel dipolequestion
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 20:57:08 -0600
Organization: Red River Net - Internet Communications (phone: [phone])
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: plaoo.dot.rrnet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I)

I live in an apt. And have access to the roof it measures about 100x
200 feet.  I wold like to put up an antenna but keep it somewhat
hidden.  The maager said to goahead but if there wer any questions he
didn't know anything, (CYOA)!!  What is the spacing for a paralel dipole
cut for difernt freqs. and can I use 5 wire rotator cable , and can I
use 75 ohm cable to feed it using a tunner. or can I use 300 ohm twin
lead or cen I use a combination of twin lead and a single wir dipole. I
wold like to get on 80-10 mtr.
   BTW  I have 2- 3ft. trypods and 2- 5 ft. mast is max height, all on a
wooden flat roof.

  thanks for any help.

  73 Mike   KA0ZLG / AFA3JQ


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:07 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!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: parrel dipolequestion
Date: 29 Oct 1996 05:08:04 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <5543fk$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup523.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

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

>What is the spacing for a paralel dipole cut for difernt freqs. and can I use

>5 wire rotator cable,

Probably not very well.  The wires have to fan out apart from each other and
be spaced a ways apart at the tips.  Sort of like taking your hand and spreadi
ng
your fingers apart.   That makes the 5 wire rotator cable pretty weak in how t
o
support all this, especially for lengths you would need for 80 and 40 meters.

A trap type single wire would be likely easier to support, perhaps less likely

to be seen if the traps were small and lower power levels were involved.

>BTW  I have 2- 3ft. trypods and 2- 5 ft. mast is max height, all on a
>wooden flat roof.

All the more reason to contemplate a single wire solution.  Which one will
control the type of feed line you will use.....

  73 Mike   KA0ZLG / AFA3JQ


//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:08 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!athos.itribe.net!global.gc.net!sourcebbs!bob.roach
From: [e-mail] (BOB ROACH)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: RE: parrel dipolequestion
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 96 09:07:00 -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: 36

MI>-I live in an apt. And have access to the roof it measures about 100x
  >-200 feet.  I wold like to put up an antenna but keep it somewhat
  >-hidden.  The maager said to goahead but if there wer any questions he
  >-didn't know anything, (CYOA)!!  What is the spacing for a paralel dipole
  >-cut for difernt freqs. and can I use 5 wire rotator cable , and can I
  >-use 75 ohm cable to feed it using a tunner. or can I use 300 ohm twin
  >-lead or cen I use a combination of twin lead and a single wir dipole. I
  >-wold like to get on 80-10 mtr.
  >-   BTW  I have 2- 3ft. trypods and 2- 5 ft. mast is max height, all on a
  >-wooden flat roof.

Hi,

You might be interested in the antenna I am now using.  I is an
offcenter fed dipole which works on several bands without a tuner.  You
cut the dipole for the lowest freq. that the space will allow.  I only
have room for 40M but 160M or 80M would work too.  The dipole is fed at
a point with on third of the length on one side and two third on the
other. The feed point impedance here is 300 ohms and you need 300 ohm
"window" line (twin lead might work for low power)  I have about 20 feet
of this and then a 4:1 balun (6:1 would be perfect) and coax the rest of
the way to the rig.  If you cut the antenna for 40M it is a half wave
dipole at 40M.  It is a full wave at 20M and the feed point falls one
third of the way from the end of one of the half waves so the feedpoint
is again 300 ohms. Same thing happens at 10M.  Before you start do the
math for the different lengths/freq. and see where it will fall in each
band.

If you have any questions let me know.

73
Bob
KE4QOK


 * SLMR 2.1a * [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:08 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsserv.freeway.net!news
From: <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: phased verticals
Date: 29 Oct 1996 02:10:02 GMT
Organization: ken cubilo electric
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <01bbc53e$78d52760$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm7-27.freeway.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

I'm looking to hear from anyone out there using phased
verticals on 40 meters to be more specific the phasing
methods that are being used besides the old standby
of the coaxial tee connector and 1/4  wave sections
of transmission line. I have tried using the 1/4 wave
sections of transmission line to phase the antennas
which are a quarter wave apart without much sucess
in getting a very well defined radiation pattern from the
antennas and keep telling myself there must be a better
way to do this besides buying a comtek or equal unit
to perform the steering.
tks we8w


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:09 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (GilHug)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Plastic End Caps
Date: 23 Oct 1996 21:50:27 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 9
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54mi13$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (GilHug)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I am trying to locate a supplier for the plastic end caps like one would
find on the end of a beam antenna.  In fact, I am rebuilding a Cushcraft
ATB-34 and need 8 ea. 1 5/8" ID end caps to go on my trap covers.  The
pair that I have say Niagara on the end of them, but for the life of me I
can not locate an antenna manufacturer that can supply these size caps.
Cushcraft no longer supports this antenna.  As a matter of reference, the
7/8" holes needed to run the element through can be drilled by me.  If you
can point me in a direction for locating these parts, I would be greatful.
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:10 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!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!ae517
From: [e-mail] (Russ Renaud)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Problem with A446-6S Yagi
Date: 22 Oct 1996 12:51:10 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 17
Sender: [e-mail] (Russ Renaud)
Message-ID: <54ifvu$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Russ Renaud)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet2.carleton.ca


Stephen Lui ([e-mail]) writes:
> Well, I was brave enough to get onto the roof of my 2 story townhouse and
> put up a couple of antennas this weekend. I have a RS Discone and a
> Cushcraft A446-6S yagi both on a 5 ft mast. The Discone gets above the roof
> line, but the yagi is just below.
>
> I'm trying to get into a distant repeater and my discone hears better than
> my yagi! Isn't the yagi supposed to have 10dB gain and the discone 0dB? I
> can't key up the repeater with either antenna though (FT-50R).

Just so we're reading from the same page, is the yagi vertically polarized?

If it's (the beam) horizontal in polarization, you can expect to lose in the
order of 20dB difference for vertically polarized sigs.

73 de va3rr/aa8lu


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:11 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!lui
From: [e-mail] (Stephen Lui)
Subject: Problem with A446-6S Yagi
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 17:48:07 GMT
Lines: 23
Sender: [e-mail]

Well, I was brave enough to get onto the roof of my 2 story townhouse and
put up a couple of antennas this weekend. I have a RS Discone and a
Cushcraft A446-6S yagi both on a 5 ft mast. The Discone gets above the roof
line, but the yagi is just below.

I'm trying to get into a distant repeater and my discone hears better than
my yagi! Isn't the yagi supposed to have 10dB gain and the discone 0dB? I
can't key up the repeater with either antenna though (FT-50R).

How much does the mast and discone affect the radiation pattern of the yagi?
Should I put the yagi on another mast or just further away from the discone?

Right now they are only about 6 inches apart. I did aim the yagi for maximum
signal strength.

I'm trying to stay with a 5ft mast to avoid guy wires.

I'm using 50 ft of RG/58U for each antenna (easier to work with and I plan
to move within the year).

When I do move, will a Comet GP-9N and 9913 work much better?

Stephen


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:13 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!portal.gmu.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-9.sprintlink.net!ratty.wolfe.net!usenet
From: Ramon Gandia <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Problem with A446-6S Yagi
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 01:40:55 -0800
Organization: Anvil Technology
Lines: 84
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: nome-ts1-p01.nome.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Stephen Lui wrote:
>
> Well, I was brave enough to get onto the roof of my 2 story townhouse and
> put up a couple of antennas this weekend. I have a RS Discone and a
> Cushcraft A446-6S yagi both on a 5 ft mast. The Discone gets above the roof
> line, but the yagi is just below.
>
> I'm trying to get into a distant repeater and my discone hears better than
> my yagi! Isn't the yagi supposed to have 10dB gain and the discone 0dB? I
> can't key up the repeater with either antenna though (FT-50R).

> Right now they are only about 6 inches apart. I did aim
> the yagi for maximum signal strength.
>
> I'm trying to stay with a 5ft mast to avoid guy wires.
>
> I'm using 50 ft of RG/58U for each antenna (easier to
> work with and I plan to move within the year).
>
> When I do move, will a Comet GP-9N and 9913 work much better?

Stephen,

        6 inch spacing between the two antennas will affect
them very much adversely.  YOu should try for 10 to 20
feet of separation, with the discone not in the front
semicircle of the beam's aim.

        Also, 5 feet is mighty skimpy.  You will bet a lot
of interaction from the roof, detuning, etc.  This is much
more critical on a beam than on a discone.  However, it
might just work IF you are 5 feet ABOVE the highest part
of the roof.  If you are below rooftop level, nothing much
is going to help.

        My experience in 40 years of this, is that it is
much better to have a light, simple antenna, like a quarter
wave ground plane way up high and in the clear, than a big
antenna or beam down low.  You will find out that when
you are talking only 5 ft above the roof, performance will
be "dismal" at best.  You can either leave the discone
where it is for comparison purposes, or move it up as well.
But try and get that beam 15 to 20 feet up.  I like to use
1.25 or 1.5 inch water pipe, guyed three or 4 ways, and
use a big barndoor hinge with pipe flange for a hinge base.
A 10 inch brute hinge is good.  Set the pipe and guy wires
up, then disconnect just ONE guy and lower the pipe and
put the beam on it.  Then walk it back up and attach the
guy.  Don't skimp on guys.  I had many a 1/8 inch steel
aircraft cable break on me.  I finally went to 3/16 or 1/4
aircraft cable (wire rope 7 x 19 strand, galvanized or
stainless, and fastened with cable clamps or nicopress
sleeves).  This hardware is easy to raise and lower if
you lay out the guys intellingently and do it like I
told you.  I assume you have a flat roof; peaked roofs
are always a hassle.  Tie a rope around your neck in
case you fall off the roof you dont get killed!  ;-)

As for RG-58 on UHF, I am about to either puke or start
laughing.  In 50 ft of cable, once past the brand-new,
still at the store stage, you will easily lose 6 db
or more in it.  Yes, get RG-213 or 9913 coax (with the
foil and braid shields).

Also, check that the repeater is "open" and doesn't need
a P.L. tone to key it up.  With no PL on your set, you will
HEAR it just fine, but will never key it up!  Investigate
this.

Let us know how you make out; write if you need anything
clarified.

Oh....PS.  Your Beam has the elements VERTICAL, right?

Note the blurb about my e-mail address below.  YOus would
be spelled out: lui.at.netcom.dot.com  convert mine likewise
before you hit the reply button!!!!
--
In order to foil SpamBots, my e-mail address is not
machine readable.  Please reply to address below:

Ramon Gandia,    Nome, Alaska  |    rfg.at.nome.dot.net
AL7X          S/V Seven Stars  |
907-443-2437 fax [phone]  | where at=@  dot=period


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:14 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: QST's The Doctor is IN
Date: 23 Oct 1996 11:33:07 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 53
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54ldrj$[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, let's say the LW is 60ft long. It has to be supported at each
>end by something. Looping an additional 80ft piece of wire back from
>the far end to the braid gives a pretty good 40m delta loop. Everything
>stays the same and just the additional wire is added. Doesn't really
>take up any more room assuming the additional wire has space to hang
>under the original wire.

He couldn't get much vertical separation, and now the near filed
excitation of stuff below the antenna can (it might, it might not)
increase.
>
>Doesn't the LW counterpoise running from the rig across the floor of the
>apartment radiate?

Sure, and so will the feeder of the loop if it isn't choked.  I could
choke both feeders at the window.

>Doesn't the unterminated coax braid radiate?

Did the doctor tell him not terminate it?

>to me, a balanced loop would be more than "slightly better".

Might be, might not be. Compare it to what I would do. I would lay criss
crossed aluminum foil under my rug, with wires coming out to use as ground
points. I'd tie everything (including the electric safety ground and
heater vents) to that "ground plane" in my room. I'd run multiple
counterpoise wires in whatever direction I could, and put my matching
network at the window and ground it to the foil, and feed a 1/2 wl end fed
wire (if possible). I get the counterpoises near the window or outside if
I could, and make them symmetrical.

Now I've got a reasonably low Z ground when compared to the antenna end.
Current flow would be minimal and the real problem would be the "high
impedance" electric near field. Since the ground was near the window, most
current flow would be there. Since the ground was physically large, the
current (and fields) would be spread out and less intense.

This system might couple less power into the house than the loop, because
the house is "off the end" of the antenna. While the wire dropping to form
the loop is "broadside" to the house, the long wire presents a low profile
end view.

So while the loop is one solution (and a good one), it isn't the only one
and neither is mine. Telling someone what to do is tough to do unless you
can scope out the whole perimeter.

It's tough to answer a question with writing an article.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:15 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.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: QST's The Doctor is IN
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 17:30:26 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <54jmjp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.102.182
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 think the doctor did alright in this case, even if a balanced antenna is
> slightly better. Maybe the guy only has room for a LW.

Hi Tom, let's say the LW is 60ft long. It has to be supported at each
end by something. Looping an additional 80ft piece of wire back from
the far end to the braid gives a pretty good 40m delta loop. Everything
stays the same and just the additional wire is added. Doesn't really
take up any more room assuming the additional wire has space to hang
under the original wire.

Doesn't the LW counterpoise running from the rig across the floor of the
apartment radiate? Doesn't the unterminated coax braid radiate? Seems
to me, a balanced loop would be more than "slightly better".

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


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:16 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.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: QST's The Doctor is IN
Date: 22 Oct 1996 19:50:17 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 32
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54jmjp$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Cecil,

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

>In the latest QST a ham writes: "40m...3rd floor apartment...
>end-fed ant...tuner...earth ground? The Doctor is IN replies,
>"counter-poise". IMO, this is poor advice. A side-fed delta
>loop or triangular loop antenna needs no counter-poise.

But a delta loop is a more complex antenna, and the guy may not have space
or supports for that antenna. In that case, the doctor gave a good
prescription.

>Why the heck does anyone worry about counter-poises
>with "end-fed" antennas when one can use a side-fed
>delta loop or triangular loop?

Because some people just don't want to mess with supporting a loop. If I
were in an apartment, or stuck with operating from the second or third
floor of a house, I'd have few qualms about using a counterpoise and long
wire. I'd prefer something else, like a dipole, but I wouldn't worry about
the end fed wire. If I had the supports at the right locations, I might
even use a loop.

But I wouldn't expect complete freedom from RF problems with anything on
the third floor.

I think the doctor did alright in this case, even if a balanced antenna is
slightly better. Maybe the guy only has room for a LW.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:17 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!btnet!btinternet!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jason Williams-Lock)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: quarter-wave matching for receiving dipole
Date: 22 Oct 1996 22:07:15 GMT
Organization: none
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <54jgij$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: host-73-36-226.btinternet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.8 (16bit)

Hello to the group!

I have a single centre-fed dipole (not the folded type) connected to a length
of 300-ohm twin balanced (ribbon) feeder which terminates on the screw
terminals (300-ohm balanced input) on my v.h.f (Band II) FM receiving
equipment.

Now it appears that I can ignore the 4:1 mismatch between free-space and the
dipole due to the dipole being terminated in a wrong load (300 instead of 75
ohms) when in a strong field-strength, as I am, but I notice that the
mismatch *IS NOTICEABLE* when I try to receive weaker, DX stations (i.e
stations that are just above noise threshold of receiver, when correct match,
fall down into the noise with the mismatch)

Now instead of using a folded dipole, which of course would do the job, I
would like to try and have a go at using a quarter-wave transformer to match
the 300-ohm input impedance of the feeder into the 75 ohms for the dipole,
the dipole will then take this 75 ohms and transform it into 377 ohms which
will match free-space, the dipole will present a correct match to free-space
and I will have maximum energy transfer.

What I would like to know is, can I use a quarter-wave match for receiving,
will this work, I would have thought so, and does anyone know what the
bandwidth of a quarter-wave transformer depends on, I would like it to
operate over the band 97.6 to 99.8 MHz (BBC Radio 1 FM), I would make the
transformer using either heavy gauge copper wire, or aluminium rods or
tubing, and choose the correct spacing and diameter to give a characteristic
impedance of about 150 ohms, which I have got from the formula to calculate
the Zo of a quarter-wave transformer for matching Zin to ZLoad.

Any advice would be appreciated, especially from those who have experience
and/or use quarter-wave transformers in their antenna systems.

Thankyou!

Jason,



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:18 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news
From: "Al and/or Lorie Z." <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Question: RGU-400
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 16:07:27 +0000
Organization: UNQS: (Uhhh, not quite sure)
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: clsm-65ppp109.epix.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Macintosh; I; 68K)

Hi and thanks for reading,

I have a bunch of coax labeled  THERMAX RGU-400 MIL-SPEC C-17F.  I am
having a heap of trouble finding the operating range on this one.

From what I found out it is 50 ohm, but I have no idea of db loss/100 ft
on 144 and 440.  I am also unable to find the max RMS volts that can be
fed to it.


Any help would be appreciated.  I would like to use it for
mountain-topping only and not a permanent installation.


73 de AL, N3KAE


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:19 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news
From: "Al and/or Lorie Z." <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Question: RGU-400
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 16:09:14 +0000
Organization: UNQS: (Uhhh, not quite sure)
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: clsm-65ppp109.epix.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Macintosh; I; 68K)

Hi and thanks for reading,

I have a bunch of coax labeled  M17/175-00001 MIL-C-17F 12814 THERMAX
RGU-400.  I am having a heap of trouble finding the operating range on
this one.

From what I found out it is 50 ohm, but I have no idea of db loss/100 ft
on 144 and 440.  I am also unable to find the max RMS volts that can be
fed to it.


Any help would be appreciated.  I would like to use it for
mountain-topping only and not a permanent installation.


73 de AL, N3KAE


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:21 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz.cv.hp.com!tomb
From: [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Question: RGU-400
Date: 25 Oct 1996 16:03:58 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard Corvallis Site
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <54qode$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hplsnb.lsid.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL9.4]

Al and/or Lorie Z. ([e-mail]) wrote:

: I have a bunch of coax labeled        M17/175-00001 MIL-C-17F 12814 THERMAX
: RGU-400.  I am having a heap of trouble finding the operating range on
: this one.

: From what I found out it is 50 ohm, but I have no idea of db loss/100 ft
: on 144 and 440.  I am also unable to find the max RMS volts that can be
: fed to it.

If it's RG-400/U, it should be .116 inches OD, Teflon dielectric and FEP
jacket, two silvered-copper braids.  It's rated for 1900 volts RMS, though
unless you were using it in pulsed mode, it would be thermally limited,
not voltage limited, on 144 MHz and above.  My table doesn't list
attenuation for that particular cable, but attenuation in cable of
decent construction is determined by copper losses, and you can expect
the following equation to be pretty accurate:

  A100 = 0.43*(1/d+1/D)*sqrt(f)/Z0

where
  A100 = matched-line loss, dB/100ft
  d    = inner conductor OD, inches
  D    = outer conductor ID, inches
  f    = operating frequency, MHz
  Z0   = line characteristic impedance, ohms.

This is valid for copper conductors at about room temperature.  Add about
7 percent each for stranded center conductor versus solid, and for braid
versus solid outer conductor.  Need to consider dielectric losses above
440, but they usually are unimportant at 440 and below.  Also, it falls
apart at frequencies so low that the conductors are no longer a few skin
depths thick.

--
Cheers,
Tom
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:22 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!super.zippo.com!zdc-e!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!news.tc.cornell.edu!newsserver.sdsc.edu!news.cerf.net!hacgate2.hac.com!news.delcoelect.com!usenet
From: Chris Nicholson <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Question: RGU-400
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 08:04:54 -0500
Organization: Delco Electronics
Lines: 19
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: koicpc0n.delcoelect.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win95; I)

Al and/or Lorie Z. wrote:
>
> Hi and thanks for reading,
>
> I have a bunch of coax labeled  THERMAX RGU-400 MIL-SPEC C-17F.  I am
> having a heap of trouble finding the operating range on this one.
>
> From what I found out it is 50 ohm, but I have no idea of db loss/100 ft
> on 144 and 440.  I am also unable to find the max RMS volts that can be
> fed to it.
>
> Any help would be appreciated.  I would like to use it for
> mountain-topping only and not a permanent installation.
>
> 73 de AL, N3KAE

Al, unless you need short runs at microwave or well shielded jumpers for
your repeater duplexer I would use 9913. RG400 is sweep tested to about
12ghz I think and lists for 450$ for 100' spool.


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:23 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!nwnews.wa.com!nwfocus.wa.com!rook.wa.com!eugene.welcome
From: [e-mail] (Eugene Welcome)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Question: RGU-400
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 01:02:32 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Distribution: world
Lines: 22

Al> RGU-400. having a heap of trouble finding the operating range
Al> I found out it is 50 ohm, but I have no idea of db loss/100 ft
Al> on 144 and 440. I am also unable to find the max RMS volts that can
Al> be fed to it. Any help would be appreciated. I would like to use it
Al> for mountain-topping only and not a permanent installation.
Al> 73 de AL, N3KAE

Hi Al; Here is what I have. I found the info in a Newark catalog.

                       Coax Data for RG400/U

                  | Attenuation - db/100 feet |Jacket|Velocity|  KV |
RG # |Dielect|Imp.| 100 MHz| 400 MHz| 1000 MHz|  OD  | Factor | max |
-----|-------|----|--------|--------|---------|------|--------|-----|
400/U|Teflon | 50 |  3.1   |  8.1   |  13     | .195 |  .69   | 1.9 |
     |       |    |        |        |         |      |        |     |

                       _   /|
                       \'o 0'
73, Gene, K7"EEK" !! a =(_"_)= ?? He ate my Mouse !
                          U
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:24 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!panix!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: RE: Radiation and Accelerating Charges
Date: 29 Oct 1996 22:30:31 GMT
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) (1.10)
Lines: 9
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news-fddi.aol.com

Tom, W8JI seems to believe that radiating charges radiate best when
radiated from a 'straight line'. Tell us, Tom, exactly what you mean by
this. I'd really like to know. Be sure to tell us how this relates to the
acceleration and what it means to 'accelerate'. Equations ok!

 Remember the 'magic' word: a-c-c-e-l-e-r-a-t-i-on.

73
Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:26 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tir.com!news
From: "J. Mc Laughlin" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re;  Rhombic antenna
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 23:44:41 -0800
Organization: The Internet Ramp
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: an53.tir.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)

Lundgren William E wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi Bill,
> >
>
> > The ARRL Antenna Handbook will give you construction details, but the gain
> > will be much less than predicted. The real advantage of a Rhombic is
> > simple construction and bandwidth, not gain. You can get more gain in much
> > less space with many antennas, including the smaller curtains used at VOA.
>
>      Thanks for the information Tom. You're the only one who answered this
> question in a civil manor.
>
..  Rhombic antennas were fair value when land and poles were relatively
inexpensive.  As a practical matter, about 1.5:1 band width before the
pattern goes strange and poor side lobes are the general case.
        Purely as an intelectual task, I once tried to optimize
Rhombic design.  With the computational aids then available, it
was a fool's task as there are too many varables.
        You can get a very good picture (yes: picture) of what a Rhombic does
by using the antenna part of VOA's propagation program.  No need to use
the excelent EZNEC ( or the like).
        I once saw a VHF rhombic in West Va.  -  owner came back from
the Signal C. and decided it was a way to make an inexpensive TV
antenna.
                Enjoy,    Mac


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:27 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!myth.vianet.on.ca!newsfeed.vivanet.com!imci5!pull-feed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!lily.redrose.net!john
From: [e-mail] (me)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Seeking Ham radio info (antennas)
Date: 26 Oct 1996 13:43:56 GMT
Organization: Your Organization
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <54t4is$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: l56.redrose.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.5
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41216 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20498 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117029 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30474

        I'm looking for some information on some ideas for a 2 meter
antenna. My call is N3XZX.  I basically recieved a homebrewed antenna from a
gentleman in Atlantic City.  I liked the idea and tend to build a few
myself.  It's just a plain old ground plain antenna,  The one i recieved was
a quarter wave and i was wondering if there was any ideas and info for
making the same type but creating a 5/8 wave.
        I heard for a 5/8 you need to have a top hat, is this true? Also any
info on whether this 5/8 is a good antenna comparing it to the quarter wave.
 Any info would be greatly appreciated!
                                Thanks,
                                    N3XZX
                                        (Chris)
















Please carbon copy responses to [e-mail] so I don't miss
any good info



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:29 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!novia!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Paul W Schleck KD3FU)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Seeking Ham radio info (antennas)
Date: 26 Oct 1996 13:39:55 -0000
Organization: Novia Internetworking <> 33.6kbps dialup; 402/390-2NET
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <54tltr$[e-mail]>
References: <54t4is$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: oasis.novia.net
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 CURRENT #1
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41221 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20500 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117034 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30480

In <54t4is$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (me) writes:

>       I'm looking for some information on some ideas for a 2 meter
>antenna. My call is N3XZX.  I basically recieved a homebrewed antenna from a
>gentleman in Atlantic City.  I liked the idea and tend to build a few
>myself.  It's just a plain old ground plain antenna,  The one i recieved was
>a quarter wave and i was wondering if there was any ideas and info for
>making the same type but creating a 5/8 wave.
>       I heard for a 5/8 you need to have a top hat, is this true? Also any
>info on whether this 5/8 is a good antenna comparing it to the quarter wave.
> Any info would be greatly appreciated!
>                               Thanks,
>                                   N3XZX
>                                       (Chris)

In addition to the excellent replies and suggestions that I'm sure
you'll get on this newsgroup, you may also wish to consult my Amateur
Radio Elmers Resource Directory:

http://www.novia.net/~pschleck/elmers/

There are a number of good antenna "Elmers" listed, accessible directly
from:

http://www.novia.net/~pschleck/elmers/antennas.html

--
73, Paul W. Schleck, KD3FU
[e-mail]
http://www.novia.net/~pschleck/
Finger [e-mail] for PGP Public Key


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:30 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Seeking Ham radio info (antennas)
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 21:52:17 -0700
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54t4is$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)
To: me <[e-mail]>
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41274 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20523 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117068 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30528

me wrote:
>
>         I'm looking for some information on some ideas for a 2 meter
> antenna. My call is N3XZX.  I basically recieved a homebrewed antenna from a
> gentleman in Atlantic City.  I liked the idea and tend to build a few
> myself.  It's just a plain old ground plain antenna,  The one i recieved was
> a quarter wave and i was wondering if there was any ideas and info for
> making the same type but creating a 5/8 wave.
>         I heard for a 5/8 you need to have a top hat, is this true? Also any
> info on whether this 5/8 is a good antenna comparing it to the quarter waveN
3XZX Chris

altavoz: No hat required for 5/8 w. A 5/8w is much better for vert'
omni directional than 1/4w . Same coil for 1/4w but tapped a little
different . Radials must be 180 degrees, straight down, with
"wiskers" ( going down 1/4w from feed point, some 1/4w radials at
45 degree angle...they form a cone ).
  A hat on 5/8 w will effect the pattern , try it.
For more gain, put a hairpin ( <1/4w shorted stub) on top of 5/8 then
another 5/8w vert on top of that . Or the whole ant' a 5/4w and a
colinear stub pointing down ( open end down , at the 5/8 w point)
Coax up thru "tube" Radial system.
          |
          |
          |_
          | |
          | |
          | |
          |
          |
          |
          |
          |
          |
          feed
          |
          |
          |
        / | \
       /  |  \
      /   |   \


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:30 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!news-in2.uu.net!cs.utexas.edu!news.ti.com!newsfeed.mc.ti.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jim Flanders)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: shielding my house
Date: 21 Oct 1996 12:58:33 GMT
Organization: Texas Instruments @ Sherman
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <54fs1p$[e-mail]>
References: <01bbbe07$cbf1f1a0$5c203fce@a-greggd>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shtip114.dseg.ti.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.7

Gregg:
  Before you go through a lot of expense and effort, get someone to
take a signal strength survey.  Make sure they have good, accurate
equipment, and are familiar with the FCC and OSHA regulations.  There
is a good chance that your local radio club will know of a
professional in this field.
Jim W0oog/5  Plano, TX

In article <01bbbe07$cbf1f1a0$5c203fce@a-greggd>, [e-mail]
says...
>
>Can anyone advise on how, or sources of info for shielding my kids
bedrooms
>from the adjacent cell tower transmitter?  I'm think metal or foil on
the
>walls, ???
>



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:32 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!mrwolf.demon.co.uk!Mandy
From: Mandy Wright <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: shielding my house
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 16:05:11 +0100
Organization: Radio Services
Lines: 50
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbbe07$cbf1f1a0$5c203fce@a-greggd> <[e-mail]>
 <54f7bt$[e-mail]> <01bbbfd5$6c9899a0$53213fce@a-greggd>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mrwolf.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: mrwolf.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 3.00 <oJPoSssIZV2StO2Ral+KdVy6du>

In article <01bbbfd5$6c9899a0$53213fce@a-greggd>, Gregg Daugherty
<[e-mail]> writes
>wow, lots of responses. Thanks.
>
>To be more precise, 2 cellular companies propose to place their antennas at
>500 feet ,and 250 feet from my house.  Each will have 15 twenty watt
>transmitters, or when all are running, 300 total watts.

As the transmitters are on different frequencies, the effect is not
additive at a single frequency.  The peak field strength will not change
no matter how many transmitters are put up, however the power will be
spread over a greater bandwidth.  This will lead to an increase of the
thermal effects caused by absorbtion. These levels are still
insignificant, I seem to recall experiments conducted in the Soviet
Union using continuous radiation and pulsed carrier: the levels were in
the order of 0.1 milliwatts/cm squared , but I cant remember where I
read this.  I also read a study carried out in the US by Dr Belzano on
behalf of Motorola, studying the effects of RF on pigs (their brain and
eye tissue is similar to humans).  I have a copy of this somewhere.
>  Both antennas will
>be omnidirectional, and will be a 15 foot tall whip with the base at 30
>feet above ground.  My house is slighly more exposed as it is slightly up a
>hill and hence more in the "beam".  Also 2 more PCS companies seek to place
>similar antennas between the 2 cellular antennas, similar wattage, albeit
>higher frequency.  As I recall the phone company calculations, the total
>exposure to my house will be from2 to 3 or so Microwatts/cm^2.  I don't
>think its trivial.  For a couple of years, probably ok, but for 10 or so,
>and my kids are 6 months and 18 months old.....they are exposed just as
>their systems are developing.
>
>Any advice on either the 3 microwatts is no big deal, or maybe I should
>shield or move.  ps, the transmitter site is also their school and church
>and playground is next door.  Sort of one stop shopping!
>>
>>

Jokes:
If you want to have some fun with the Cel-phone company, get a friendly
RF engineer to build you a pair of large corner reflector antennas.
Assemble as an "onfrequncy" repeater, these are normally used to fill in
dead spots and increase coverage.  Point one of these at the cell site,
insert a small amplifier (the gain of which must be less than twice the
front to back ratio of the antennas, minus the feeder loss or the system
will be unstable),in the feeder the output of which is conneded to the
other antenna on the opposite side of the building.  This will really
screw up their coverage by putting a hole in the radiation pattern ;)
Mandy
(Replying on behalf of my husband, Tim (G1BCR / G9BZW) who hates computers
despite (or maybe because of) being a practising RF Engineer.)
(He's going to *have* to learn to type!)        Sussex  UK


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:33 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!feed1.news.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] (PTracy)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: shielding my house
Date: 26 Oct 1996 06:08:17 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 11
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54snuh$[e-mail]>
References: <01bbbec4$76d41aa0$af203fce@a-greggd>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <01bbbec4$76d41aa0$af203fce@a-greggd>, "Gregg Daugherty"
<[e-mail]> writes:

>I'm trying to avoid exposing young children to possible adverse impact
from
>microwave radiation from cell towers.  Given there are no studies of the
>effects of 900 mhz over long periods of time, I either move or somehow
>shield my kids.

Who said it's "adverse"?  Some wing-nut wearing Birkenstocks on the local
news?


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:34 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!nntp.uio.no!sn.no!newsfeed.tip.net!news.jos.net!dos.canit.se!seunet!mn7.swip.net!mn6.swip.net!mn5.swip.net!news
From: Maude Schyffert <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Simple SSB Antenna
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 09:56:37 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54gtms$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup122-6-12.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 3.0Gold (Win16; I)
To: John Humphries NTLIS 61 8 89244039 <[e-mail]>

John Humphries NTLIS 61 8 89244039 wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Please excuse the dumb question but I need some help to design an antenna fo
r
> an
> SSB radio at a frequency of 7034 Khz.
>
> I'm not after anything very fancy but thought I could do a little better tha
n
> throwing a wire up a tree.

Half-way dipole or 1/4 Lamba vertical would do fine.

SM0BKZ


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:35 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!news.eunet.fi!jjo
From: [e-mail] (Jari Jokiniemi)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Simple SSB Antenna
Date: 24 Oct 1996 09:34:33 GMT
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54gtms$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ds10.tekla.fi
In-reply-to: Avatar's message of Tue, 22 Oct 1996 17:38:50 -0700


In article <[e-mail]> Avatar <[e-mail]> writes:
   John Humphries NTLIS 61 8 89244039 wrote:
   > SSB radio at a frequency of 7034 Khz.
   >  Part time Mechanic, Builder    Fax     [phone]   Australia
   >   and Quilter                   Email   [e-mail]
   > -----------------------------------------------------------------------

   I will admit I have not been very active in recent months. When did the
   FCC allocate SSB operation on 7034 KHz?

Considering the fact that the fellow who asked the question seems to
be in Australia, I wonder what interest does the FCC has to this
issue. In Finland too, we can operate any mode between 7000 and 7100
kHz. The sad point being that we cannot transmit at all at e.g. 7200
kHz, as our band ends at 7100 kHz.

This reminds me of the CQWWDX SSB contest to come. What are the
different USA SSB segments on 7 MHz for different classes?

--
Jari Jokiniemi, [e-mail], OH2MPO, OH3BU
Tekla Oy, Koronakatu 1, 02210 Espoo, [phone]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:36 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!malgudi.oar.net!watt.oedison.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (John Wagner)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Simple SSB Antenna
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 17:34:36 GMT
Organization: Ohio Edison Company, Akron OH
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <3271f9fa.19770976@news>
References: <54gtms$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: go-bus-appl4-8x.oedison.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.299

Avatar <[e-mail]> wrote:

>John Humphries NTLIS 61 8 89244039 wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Please excuse the dumb question but I need some help to design an antenna f
or
>> an
>> SSB radio at a frequency of 7034 Khz.
>>
>> I'm not after anything very fancy but thought I could do a little better th
an
>> throwing a wire up a tree.
>>
>> Much thanks in advance,
>> John Humphries
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>  John Humphries                 Dept of Lands, Planning and Environment
>>  GIS Analysist / Programmer     Phone   [phone]   Darwin  N.T.
>>  Part time Mechanic, Builder    Fax     [phone]   Australia
>>   and Quilter                   Email   [e-mail]
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>I will admit I have not been very active in recent months. When did the
>FCC allocate SSB operation on 7034 KHz?
>
>W0MAY
>

I will admit I have not been very active in recent months either, but
when did the FCC begin regulating the 40 meter band's usage in
Austrailia?
(check the bottom of his message)



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:37 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!news.ti.com!usenet
From: FITR BV/N0IAT <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Simple SSB Antenna
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 18:45:27 -0800
Organization: Texas Instruments Asia,   Taipei Taiwan ROC
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54gtms$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[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 3.0 (Win16; I)
To: [e-mail]

> In article <[e-mail]> Avatar <[e-mail]>
>  I will admit I have not been very active in recent months. When did   >  th
e FCC allocate SSB operation on 7034 KHz?

FCC shouldn't have a problem -- this OM is in Australia, and the
40M band allocation is different in ITU zone 1,2, and 3.   7034 is
ok for SSB this side of the Pacific.
73,
Joe
----------------------------------------------------------
Amateur Radio:  BV/N0IAT   Taipei TAIWAN Republic of China
    http://www.transend.com.tw/~joentam/index1.html
ex.  7J1AOF (Japan)  YU3/N0IAT (Slovenia)  KA0ZDH (Novice)
Licensed Radio Amateur since 1986.  Comments are mine only.
----------------------------------------------------------


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:38 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!DIALix!brisbane.DIALix.oz.au!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Murray Kelly)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Simple SSB Antenna
Date: 28 Oct 1996 22:20:57 +1000
Organization: DIALix Services, Brisbane, Australia.
Lines: 16
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <5528f9$1v1$[e-mail]>
References: <54gtms$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: [e-mail]

FITR BV/N0IAT <[e-mail]> writes:

>> In article <[e-mail]> Avatar <[e-mail]>
>>  I will admit I have not been very active in recent months. When did   >  t
he FCC allocate SSB operation on 7034 KHz?

>FCC shouldn't have a problem -- this OM is in Australia, and the
>40M band allocation is different in ITU zone 1,2, and 3.   7034 is
>ok for SSB this side of the Pacific.
>73,
>Joe

Actually he only needs a half dipole to use on Single Side Band?
Should it be the upper or lower half?

Murray vk4aok



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:39 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.monmouth.com!news
From: Robert Bissett <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Simple SSB Antenna
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 15:43:33 -0400
Organization: Nov Schmoz Kapop
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54gtms$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <5528f9$1v1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp49.monmouth.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)

Murray Kelly wrote:
>
> FITR BV/N0IAT <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> >> In article <[e-mail]> Avatar <[e-mail]>
> >>  I will admit I have not been very active in recent months. When did   >
 the FCC allocate SSB operation on 7034 KHz?
>
> >FCC shouldn't have a problem -- this OM is in Australia, and the
> >40M band allocation is different in ITU zone 1,2, and 3.   7034 is
> >ok for SSB this side of the Pacific.
> >73,
> >Joe
>
> Actually he only needs a half dipole to use on Single Side Band?
> Should it be the upper or lower half?
>
> Murray vk4aok

Well, since the lower sideband is used most on 40m, I would vote
 for the lower half.
   But how about us guys on the other side of the
 equator from VK-land , do we use the upper or lower half? Since
 VK antennas are "upside down" does that invert the sideband?
  If using the wrong half rejects the signal, couldn't another two
hams use the other halves at the same time? Doubling the spectrum?
 Could we be on to something here?  The possibilities are mind-boggling!

Bob  ND2L

--
      *********
Bob Bissett      [e-mail]
      *********


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:40 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!munnari.OZ.AU!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!pellew.ntu.edu.au!usenet
From: John Humphries NTLIS 61 8 89244039 <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Simple SSB antenna Update
Date: 28 Oct 1996 22:27:46 GMT
Organization: Dept of Lands Planning and Environment
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <553c12$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.191.144.27
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.12 (X11; I; AIX 2)
X-URL: news:rec.radio.amateur.antenna

Hi all,

Sorry to spoil your fun but I was given the wrong frequency, I should have
put in 7340 KHz. Of course getting things 3rd hand that wasn't the one I need
anyway, it's actually in the 5MHz range. I will wait till I see the crystal in
the box before I put any wire in the air.

Thank you to all those who responed, the dipole antenna should be up in a week
or so.

Regards, John Humphries

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 John Humphries   Dept of Lands, Planning and Environment
 GIS Analysist / Programmer Phone [phone] Darwin N.T.
 Part time Mechanic, Builder Fax [phone] Australia
  and Quilter   Email [e-mail]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:42 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Sommer Vertical Claims
Date: 25 Oct 1996 16:30:24 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 41
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <54r810$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Dick Boley) writes:

>40 m and above
>
>       The antenna is fed by a 50-ohm coaxial cable (feeder line) of any
>length. A coaxial broadband transformer (T1) produces a 1:4 50:200-ohm
match
>at A,
>
>providing a power radiation efficiency of 85-98% at 7 MHZ and above (40
>through 10 m bands).

Very, very,  doubtful.

Unless they count heat as radiation. :-)

>75-80 and 160 m bands
SNIP
>It is interesting to note that there is no measurable SWR reading at the
>antenna. Unfavorable electrical surroundings result simply in a higher
return
>to theterminal resistor. (If you want to check your return power, just
insert a
>wattmeter in your tuning line.)

SWR and return loss are not directly related to radiation efficiency. I
think someone needs a review course on antennas.

The performance of any 30 ft tall vertical end loaded by a resistor on the
second folded leg, especially over a less than perfect ground, would be
pathetic on almost every band.

Consider this:

A 3.3 wavelength long traveling wave antena located 1/3 of it's height
above ground has almost 8 dB of LOSS compared to an antenna with the same
sin x/x pattern, and 3.3 wavelengths is considered optimum. Now imagine
how well a .1 wl long travelling wave antenna would work.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:43 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!cph-1.news.DK.net!dkuug!dknet!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Peter Frenning)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Sommer Verticals (TCS-25), Opinions/Experience anyone?
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 09:43:13 GMT
Organization: Siemens Nixdorf, Denmark
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <551v5e$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: 149.212.14.30
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.1/32.230


I'm contemplating buying a Sommer multiband Vertical TCS-25 (I don't have
the space for beams(small lot/building codes))  :-(

Has anyone any practical experience with these, and/or theoretically
based opinions?

vy 73 de OZ1PIF

******************************   OZ1PIF   **************************
Peter Frenning, UNIX Product Mgr., Siemens-Nixdorf DK, Ph.: [phone]
Snailmail: Dybendalsvaenget 3, 2630 Taastrup, Denmark, Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail](...!dkuug!sni.dk!pef)(NERV: pfrenning.cph)
X400:C=DK; A=400NET; P=SCN; O=SNI; S=Frenning; G=Peter; OU1=CPH1; OU2=CC
       Private connection: [e-mail]
******  Come visit us on the web; URL http://www.sni.dk  ******


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:44 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!shockra.norwich.net!news
From: "Jim Leahy" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Spacing for Stacking Antennas
Date: 25 Oct 1996 22:37:22 GMT
Organization: Chenango Net Services
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <01bbc2c9$83bf7bc0$11821cce@yrjqyhia>
NNTP-Posting-Host: nor-pm17.norwich.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

Can anyone tell me the minimal spacing required for stacking a A3WS WARC
beam above a TA 33? Only have a 40' tower but will guy it and use a Ham IV
to rotate. Should handle it OK. Just need to know the spacing required to
allow the least amount of de-tuning of each. Thanks for any help.  ....Jim
KA2AOT
--
Jim Leahy    [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:44 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!ott.istar!istar.net!tor.istar!east.istar!news.myna.com!dh-18
From: [e-mail] (David Wood)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Specs for Screwdriver Antenna
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 96 22:56:54 GMT
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <5561gf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dh-18.rn4.myna.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4

Can anybody let me know where I can get the specs
to put together a "Screwdriver" antenna ?

D.Wood for G.O.Wood/VE3PXH: [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:45 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: James Hilliard <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Spider HF antenna
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 09:04:32 -0500
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.146.36.132
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E (Win95; I)

Has anyone had any experience with the Spider multiband
HF mobil antenna?  What do you think of it?



Mark Hilliard, N2HHR
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:46 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!midmarsh.demon.co.uk!jaycee
From: John Charles <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: T2FD antenna
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 18:52:30 +0000
Organization: JayCee's Comms Emporium
Lines: 14
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: midmarsh.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: midmarsh.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 1.11 <D1ltFcEFnJOr9pZKwN1pLQfY4G>

Query from a SWL;

I've just read the details concerning the building of the T2FD antenna
in the November issue of Short Wave Magazine (Decode section) and was
wondering if my reception on 10 through 40m ham bands would improve over
what I get from using my present end fed 66 foot long wire.

It would be nice to have some idea before buying the necessary
materials, etc., especially to hear from anyone who may have already
tried it out.

Best wishes, John
--
John Charles    [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:47 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!rhelton
From: [e-mail] (Richard Helton)
Subject: Re: T2FD antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 02:44:01 GMT
Lines: 15
Sender: [e-mail]

John Charles ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Query from a SWL;

: I've just read the details concerning the building of the T2FD antenna
: in the November issue of Short Wave Magazine (Decode section) and was
: wondering if my reception on 10 through 40m ham bands would improve over
: what I get from using my present end fed 66 foot long wire.

  It is supposedly a really terrific receiving antenna.  Build one for
  the lowest band you wish to hear and it will work for that band and all
  the way up to 10 meters.  It is also supposed to be quite.  If your
  short on space design it for 7mhz and it will only be about 45 foot long.

--
                                             [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:48 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.winterlan.com!frii.com!usenet
From: Avatar <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Tapped coil design Maxrad question
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 16:46:55 -0700
Organization: Front Range Internet, Inc.
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54946o$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftc-23.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)

Joshua Daniels wrote:
>
> Hi-
>
> I am using a maxrad mdb 1444 mobile antenna and I noticed something
> which seems unintuitively strange:
>
> I wanted to see if there was continuity between the center tab (where it
> connects to the NMO for the center of the cable) and the whip.  No continuit
y.
> Instead, there is continuity between the whip and the outer-ring (the part
> that makes connection with the shield).  Is this the way a tapped coil
> antenna should be?  Does anyone else have one of these?
>
> thanx much,
>
> Josh Daniels, N2JLL/9

Josh,

I am not familiar with that antenna, but a thought came to mind. It is
possible that a capacitor is connected in series with the coax center
conductor to the tapped coil. The capacitor may be there to cancel the
inductive reactance introduced by the tapped section or it may be one leg
of a T-network.

WOMAY




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:49 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.cyberg8t.com!host35.cyberg8t.com!user
From: [e-mail] (Raymond Sarrio)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Test your antenna knowledge try my Crossword Puzzle
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 18:17:54 -0700
Organization: Raymond Sarrio Co.
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: host35.cyberg8t.com

New to the web "Ham Radio Crossword Puzzles". Just link to
http://www.sarrio.com and follow the links to the 1st ever interactive
crossword puzzle for ham radio operators.

The only catch: You must have a Java capable browser to view the
interactive puzzle. Netscape 3.0 and Micrsoft Explorer 3.0 are both Java
Capable.

I am also looking for hams interested in adding their words and clues to
future puzzles. I looking for puzzles written with questions for the
various license class test. These puzzles are a great way to test your
knowledge of the theory before you take the test.

The correct method for writting these crossword clues and word answers,
is  explained on the Crossword Puzzle page. Check it out and let me know
what how you like it. 73's Ray
--
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] Wed Oct 30 06:22:50 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!panix!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.uoregon.edu!news.efn.org!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Dick Hughes)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Thru-the-glass ant?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 05:11:43 GMT
Organization: Oregon Public Networking
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <5555k5$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dynip129.efn.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.299

On Tue, 29 Oct 1996 21:45:44 -0600, David Cooley <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>William Kucharski wrote:
>>
>> I've had a lot of luck with and like my Larsen Kulglass 2/70.  Lots of
>> complimentary reports on my signal, though the SWR is a bit higher than wit
h
>> the equivalent mag mount - to be expected.
>>
>> If you can, make sure you can get your hands on an SWR meter.  The rod that
>> shipped with my Kulglass was a bit short, so Larsen sent me a longer one I
>> could snip to the right length - perfect!
>
>I've got the Kulglass for 2m only... swr was 1.2:1 all across the
>band... My only problem now is that I removed it from the last car it
>was in, and can't find a source for the "Sticky" on the glass mounts to
>mount it in my new car! Any leads are welcome!
>
>Thanks,
>Dave


I believe Larsen makes a kit for re-installing the glass-mount
antennas.  Should be available at HRO, etc.

Dick Hughes - W6CCD



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:51 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!ncar!uchinews!cbgw2.lucent.com!nntphub.cb.lucent.com!bigtop!nessie.dr.lucent.com!kucharsk
From: [e-mail] (William Kucharski)
Subject: Re: Thru-the-glass ant?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Netnews Administration Login)
Nntp-Posting-Host: nessie
Organization: Lucent Technologies, Denver, CO
References: <5555k5$[e-mail]>
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 01:15:04 GMT
Lines: 18

While reading article <5555k5$[e-mail]>, I noticed that
"Robert J. Schmidt" <"[e-mail]"@polaristel.net> said the
following:
 >I am looking to put a thru-the-glass antenna on my truck for 2M or
 >2M/440.  Which manufacturer should I go for?  Any experiences??

I've had a lot of luck with and like my Larsen Kulglass 2/70.  Lots of
complimentary reports on my signal, though the SWR is a bit higher than with
the equivalent mag mount - to be expected.

If you can, make sure you can get your hands on an SWR meter.  The rod that
shipped with my Kulglass was a bit short, so Larsen sent me a longer one I
could snip to the right length - perfect!
--
| William Kucharski, Lucent Technologies            | Opinions expressed herei
n
| Work Internet:  [e-mail]     | are MINE alone, NOT thos
e
| Fun Internet:  [e-mail]  Ham:  N0OKQ   | of Lucent Technologies.
| President, "Just the Ten of Us" Fan Club          | "Dittos from Denver, CO"



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:52 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.net!news.comm.net!imci5!newsfeed.internetmci.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!szdc!news
From: [e-mail] (Alex Evonosky)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Thru-the-glass ant?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 02:16:24 GMT
Organization: Zippo
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <5555k5$[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.1/32.230

"Robert J. Schmidt" <"[e-mail]"@polaristel.net> wrote:

>I am looking to put a thru-the-glass antenna on my truck for 2M or
>2M/440.  Which manufacturer should I go for?  Any experiences??
>
>TNX es 73
>Bob, WA9JDR
>[e-mail]

Hello.
I use the Larsen KL series for 2m thru glass.  Works well and has a
3dB gain.  Length of rod is 48"....
73- Alex/kb4lbx



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:53 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!news.mindspring.com!mindspring!cpk-news-feed3.bbnplanet.com!news.ipass.net![e-mail]
From: David Cooley <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Thru-the-glass ant?
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 21:45:44 -0600
Organization: IPass.net
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <5555k5$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: customs58.ipass.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

William Kucharski wrote:
>
> I've had a lot of luck with and like my Larsen Kulglass 2/70.  Lots of
> complimentary reports on my signal, though the SWR is a bit higher than with
> the equivalent mag mount - to be expected.
>
> If you can, make sure you can get your hands on an SWR meter.  The rod that
> shipped with my Kulglass was a bit short, so Larsen sent me a longer one I
> could snip to the right length - perfect!

I've got the Kulglass for 2m only... swr was 1.2:1 all across the
band... My only problem now is that I removed it from the last car it
was in, and can't find a source for the "Sticky" on the glass mounts to
mount it in my new car! Any leads are welcome!

Thanks,
Dave



--
========================================================================
David Cooley                AKA N5XMT                 [e-mail]
http://www.ipass.net/~cooldave/
Sponges grow in the ocean... Wonder how deep it would be if they didn't!
========================================================================


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:54 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.tek.com!netman.ens.tek.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Terry Burge)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Tower base installation question
Date: 22 Oct 1996 16:53:15 -0700
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton, OR, USA
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <54jmpb$[e-mail]>
References: <54guoa$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: netman.ens.tek.com

In my case I am preparing to install a Rohn 25G tilt over tower. I have
Rohn's tilt over base (the $171 expensive one) and have built an all-thread
base to put in the concrete. I am using 1/2 inch galvanized (or is it
just zinked) all thread (6 of them) 36 " long  with 1 and a 1/2 inch angle iro
n
with holes in it available at most hardware stores. It isn't a real heavy
guage so I have over built it just incase. I also had to drill out the
holes slightly to pass the 1/2 inch all-thread thru them. The trouble with
rigging up any base like this is how to support the bolts so they stick
out of the concrete and keep their shape so your holes in the tilt over
base stay lined up. This arrangement with a square of angle iron at the
bottom, another 6-8 inches from the top, and a couple diagonally crossed
pieces with U-bolts spaced in the middle should take care of that.

I used large washers and nuts thru out the construction of the base to make
sure there is lots of surface area for the bolt to holt onto on the angle
irons. For my particular tower which I plan to go 49-59 feet I think 36
inches deep on the bolts should be fine. I will also put some steel fensing
and any rebar I can come up with to strengthen the base.

One of the other things I am planning to do is use a 6 foot long all thread
driven down from the base of the hole and bolted to the framed tower base
for lightning protection. This in addition to 2-4 galvanized 8 foot ground
rods stratigically placed around the tower.

For raising the tower I plan on putting in a 3 to 4 inch pipe in the concrete
about a foot from the tower with a pulley and wench setup. That will need to
be about 20 feet long to provide a decent angle. Might go a little higher
depending on what I can come up with but the weight of this during installatio
n
is a problem (15-20 foot of 4 inch pipe is heavy!).

The tower itself I will come up with a couple of angle irons 4 feet long or
so and form and X with them and use stranded steel cable to strengthen it
for raising. This will be very similar to how large booms on antennas
are guyed from above.

Terry


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:56 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!news.ti.com!news.dseg.ti.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Brad Bradfield)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Tower base installation question
Date: 29 Oct 1996 18:09:45 GMT
Organization: TI Javelin
Lines: 82
Message-ID: <555h99$[e-mail]>
References: <54guoa$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54jmpb$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cna0157453.dseg.ti.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.7

In article <54jmpb$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
>
>In my case I am preparing to install a Rohn 25G tilt over tower. I have
>Rohn's tilt over base (the $171 expensive one) and have built an all-thread
>base to put in the concrete. I am using 1/2 inch galvanized (or is it
>just zinked) all thread (6 of them) 36 " long  with 1 and a 1/2 inch angle
iron
>with holes in it available at most hardware stores. It isn't a real heavy
>guage so I have over built it just incase. I also had to drill out the
>holes slightly to pass the 1/2 inch all-thread thru them. The trouble with
>rigging up any base like this is how to support the bolts so they stick
>out of the concrete and keep their shape so your holes in the tilt over
>base stay lined up. This arrangement with a square of angle iron at the
>bottom, another 6-8 inches from the top, and a couple diagonally crossed
>pieces with U-bolts spaced in the middle should take care of that.
>
>

One thing you don't say is how many cubic yards of concrete you're putting
into the base.  I don't have a Rohn engineering manual any more, but they'll
probably call for seven or more (!) yards for a tower your height.  Do you
know how big a hole seven yards is?  It's 5.75' X 5.75' X 5.75'!!  Also,
seven yards of concrete weighs 28,350 pounds (150 pounds/square foot, rule of
thumb.)

In short, assuming that something is "good enough" is asking for disaster,
and has gotten many hams in trouble.  The Rohn engineering manuals carry the
disclaimer that the recommendations are only stated as starting points, and
that you should acquire the services of a structual engineer to properly
design your particular installation.  Also, most tower and antenna sales
outlets will not even begin to make recommendations on an installation
because of the liability issues involved.

A serious look at the stresses and forces involved in raising and installing
a tower of this type would scare any sane individual.  Proper design would
include a complete analysis of everything involved, including the support
structure in the concrete, antenna size, wind loading on the entire
structure, etc.  It is NOT a trivial task.>


>One of the other things I am planning to do is use a 6 foot long all thread
>driven down from the base of the hole and bolted to the framed tower base
>for lightning protection. This in addition to 2-4 galvanized 8 foot ground
>rods stratigically placed around the tower.
>

Standard practice in the tower industry is to not run ground rods or cables
through the concrete base.  The reason being that a lightning strike passing
through the base can actually shatter the concrete.

>
>For raising the tower I plan on putting in a 3 to 4 inch pipe in the
concrete
>about a foot from the tower with a pulley and wench setup. That will need to
>be about 20 feet long to provide a decent angle. Might go a little higher
>depending on what I can come up with but the weight of this during
installation
>is a problem (15-20 foot of 4 inch pipe is heavy!).
>
>The tower itself I will come up with a couple of angle irons 4 feet long or
>so and form and X with them and use stranded steel cable to strengthen it
>for raising. This will be very similar to how large booms on antennas
>are guyed from above.
>

Again, the stresses involved in raising a tower like this are unbelievable!
Cities (most anyway) don't require building permits for towers and other
structures for nothing.  Many cities also require such an installation to be
designed by a Registered Professional Engineer.  They ain't just being picky,
they have to protect the public from having a neighbor's tower fall on them
or their house.

I don't want to throw water on your fire, but think you need to rethink your
installation a bit.

73's

Brad Bradfield, WB0CGH

[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:57 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!qualcomm.com!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Mary-Frances R. Bartels)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Tower Installation Info Requested
Date: 25 Oct 96 21:53:23 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

   I will first confess my ignorance concerning tower installations ---
thus the reson for this entry.  I do have the ROHN catalog and am
learning from that.  I have a question I'd like to run by the readers
here and get some opinions from folks more experienced than I am.
   This is the situation:  I bought a used 50-foot Rohn 25G tower with a
six foot top section.  I plan to install a Hygain TH3JR and two dipole
antennas to start.  I don't remember winds over 60 or 65 MPH in the 10
years I've lived here.  We do get snow and some ice.  Since I live at
5280 feet altitude my 65 MPH winds don't have the force of a 65 MPH sea
level wind.
   Here is the question:  I can bracket the tower to the house, but my
only option would be at 5 1/2 feet above ground and that to the enclosed
back porch.  Would the tower be safe with only that bracket plus two guys
to the front two corners of the house (roof)?
   Thanks in advance for any available help!
                                            73,
                                       Mary-Frances Bartels
                                            [e-mail]
                                            [phone]
                                            Just north of Denver, CO


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:58 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news2.inet.net!chezrob.rpmdp.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Robert McKenzie)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Tri-band antenna question...
Date: 25 Oct 1996 19:20:20 GMT
Organization: iNet Communications
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <54r3tl$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: chezrob.rpmdp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [UNIX 1.3 941216BETA PL0]

I'm looking for a tri-band vertical for the top of an apartment building.
So far I've found the Diamond V2000 (6m/2m/440).  Are there others, I've heard
good things about the V2000...

If you have any comments I would like to hear them.  Please reply via email to
the address below.  I'm looking at getting this in the first week of Nov...

Thanks in advance.

73's.

--

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Robert McKenzie        [e-mail]         http://www.rpmdp.com
              N3XZG  -  N3XZG@N3FLB.#NDE.DE.USA.NOAM
            Lists: [e-mail]  Body: lists



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:59 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news.islandnet.com!saloon!clinton.peebles
From: [e-mail] (Clinton Peebles)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: TV antenna amp
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 00:07:31 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Salmon Siding Saloon BBS 604-357-9942
Distribution: world
Lines: 11

Hi all.  I hope someone here can help me out.  My parents bought a house
that has a TV antenna on the roof.  The antenna has an amp at the top of
mast, but the guy who sold the house took the power supply.    The amp is
either an ARMACO or ARCHER, I can't remember which, but the model number
is 801-0292.  Does anyone here have a schematic for the power supply or
know what the voltage would be?  Please e-mail, my newsgroups are not
too reliable.

Thanks.
[e-mail]
VE7KNL


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:22:59 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!cs.utexas.edu!wotan.compaq.com!twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com!news
From: Monty Wilson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: TV antenna for 6m.
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (System Administrator)
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: very little
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 15:08:29 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: monty.pc.hou.compaq.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 20

[e-mail] (Curt Sanders) wrote:
>I need feedback on anyone who has used a TV antenna for 6m.
>I intend to use a tuner with no more than 10 watts PEP SSB/CW (at this time).
>The reason: I have a landlord who will permit only TV antennas.

Interesting problem.  I've never done it, but I do know that
some people in remote rural areas use antennas tuned to
specific channels, and you might be able to get one tuned
specifically for channel 2, maybe even extend the elements
a little bit with small wire, and forget about the tuner.
If you do use a tuner, design it with care for minimum
number of components and a minumum amount of capacitive
reactance.  You could easily lose most of your 10w inside
the tuner.

--
.........Monty.
mwilson @ flex.net (with spaces deleted)




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:00 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!EU.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!lily.redrose.net!l338.redrose.net!user
From: [e-mail] (Curt Sanders)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: TV antenna for 6m.
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 23:09:43 -0500
Organization: a Digital Internet AlphaServer Site
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: l338.redrose.net

I need feedback on anyone who has used a TV antenna for 6m.
I intend to use a tuner with no more than 10 watts PEP SSB/CW (at this time).
The reason: I have a landlord who will permit only TV antennas.
Please email me or post in this newsgroup.

Thanks es 73 de N3TLJ
www.QTH.com/N3TLJ


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:01 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.sgi.com!enews.sgi.com!news-feed.inet.tele.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: TV antenna for 6m.
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 12:58:31 -0700
Organization: -
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup105-8-1.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 3.0Gold (Win16; I)
To: Curt Sanders <[e-mail]>

Curt Sanders wrote:
>
> I need feedback on anyone who has used a TV antenna for 6m.
> I intend to use a tuner with no more than 10 watts PEP SSB/CW (at this time)
.
> The reason: I have a landlord who will permit only TV antennas.
> Please email me or post in this newsgroup.
>
> Thanks es 73 de N3TLJ
> www.QTH.com/N3TLJ
Get a 6 meter beam and say it is a TV antenna.

SM0BKZ


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:02 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: [e-mail] (Otulp)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: UHF Log Periodic Antenna
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 23:16:31 GMT
Organization: none
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <3271498a.2910103@204.127.3.4>
Reply-To: Post it here
NNTP-Posting-Host: 33.cambridge-1.ma.dial-access.att.net
X-No-Archive: Yes

Hi,
I'm trying to design a Log Periodic Antenna
Frequency range= 300-500 MHz
Number of Elements= 10

Is there a free program that will generate the element spacings out
there in the World Wide Web?...TIA



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:03 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!demos!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: [e-mail] (Otulp)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: UHF Log Periodic Antenna
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 17:28:08 GMT
Organization: none
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <32724a06.13105843@204.127.3.4>
References: <32714d84.3928043@204.127.3.4> <[e-mail]> <327233da.7428440@204.127.3.4>
Reply-To: Post it here
NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.cambridge-2.ma.dial-access.att.net
X-No-Archive: Yes
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.electronics.design:23881 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30476

Lowest frequency        300.00  MHz
Highest frequency       500.00  MHz
Tau     0.80
(Sigma)
Feeder Z        50.00   ohm
Boom Dia.       15.00   mm
Distance of Boom halves 20.56   mm
Gain Appox.     10      dBi

        metric dimesions
Element Length  Half    Dist. fr. prev. el      From Boom end
10      0.500   0.250           0.125
9       0.400   0.200   0.143   0.268
8       0.320   0.160   0.115   0.383
7       0.256   0.128   0.092   0.475
6       0.205   0.102   0.073   0.548
5       0.164   0.082   0.059   0.607
4       0.131   0.066   0.047   0.654
3       0.105   0.052   0.038   0.692
2       0.084   0.042   0.030   0.722
1       0.067   0.034   0.024   0.746




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:04 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!hammer.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: [e-mail] (Otulp)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: UHF Log Periodic Antenna
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 16:03:19 GMT
Organization: none
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <327233da.7428440@204.127.3.4>
References: <32714d84.3928043@204.127.3.4> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Post it here
NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.cambridge-2.ma.dial-access.att.net
X-No-Archive: Yes
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.electronics.design:23893 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30484

On Sat, 26 Oct 1996 11:21:24 -0400, "James P. Meyer"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

>On Fri, 25 Oct 1996, Otulp wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> I'm trying to design a Log Periodic Antenna
>> Frequency range= 300-500 MHz
>> Number of Elements= 10
>> Impedance = 50 Ohms
>>
>> Is there a free program that will generate the element spacings out
>> there in the World Wide Web?...TIA
>
>       No program needed.  Just make the longest dipole element a
>half-wave at 300 MHz and the shortest a half-wave at 500.  The difference
>between 300 and 500 is not great enough to warrant making the intermediate
>lengths anything but linearly related.
>
>       Pick a convinent boom lenght and space the elements out along it.
>You can get fancy and make the shorter elements closer together if you
>want to.
>
>       To get 50 ohms will require a balun, 4:1 should do the job.
>
>       Jim

Isn't the element spacing and the Distance of Boom halves critical to
achieve maximum gain?


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:05 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.ultranet.com!iag.net!enews.sgi.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.mathworks.com!newsgate.duke.edu!godzilla2.acpub.duke.edu!jimbob
From: "James P. Meyer" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: UHF Log Periodic Antenna
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 19:34:41 -0400
Organization: Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <32714d84.3928043@204.127.3.4> <[e-mail]> <327233da.7428440@204.127.3.4>
NNTP-Posting-Host: godzilla2.acpub.duke.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
In-Reply-To: <327233da.7428440@204.127.3.4>
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.electronics.design:23907 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30501

On Sat, 26 Oct 1996, Otulp wrote:

> >     Pick a convinent boom lenght and space the elements out along it.
> >You can get fancy and make the shorter elements closer together if you
> >want to.
> >
> Isn't the element spacing and the Distance of Boom halves critical to
> achieve maximum gain?

        Log periodics don't have much gain to begin with.  It would be
hard to make one by "eyeball" that didn't work as well as one that was
engineered to .001" accuracy after spending weeks crunching numbers into
formulas.

        Jim




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:06 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!panix!feed1.news.erols.com!cwix!babylon.internetfci.com!jmwa
From: J M Woodgate <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: UHF Log Periodic Antenna
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 21:26:45 +0000 (GMT)
Organization: J. M. Woodgate and Associates
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <32714d84.3928043@204.127.3.4> <[e-mail]> <327233da.7428440@204.127.3.4>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dip-207-0-145-18.thenet.co.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=ISO-8859-1
X-Newsreader: ANT RISCOS Marcel [ver 1.08]
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.electronics.design:24049 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30597

In article <327233da.7428440@204.127.3.4>, Otulp
<URL:mailto:[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 26 Oct 1996 11:21:24 -0400, "James P. Meyer"
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> >On Fri, 25 Oct 1996, Otulp wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >> I'm trying to design a Log Periodic Antenna
> >> Frequency range= 300-500 MHz
> >> Number of Elements= 10
> >> Impedance = 50 Ohms
> >>
> >> Is there a free program that will generate the element spacings out
> >> there in the World Wide Web?...TIA
> >
> >     No program needed.  Just make the longest dipole element a
> >half-wave at 300 MHz and the shortest a half-wave at 500.  The difference
> >between 300 and 500 is not great enough to warrant making the intermediate
> >lengths anything but linearly related.
> >
> >     Pick a convinent boom lenght and space the elements out along it.
> >You can get fancy and make the shorter elements closer together if you
> >want to.
> >
> >     To get 50 ohms will require a balun, 4:1 should do the job.
> >
> >     Jim
>
> Isn't the element spacing and the Distance of Boom halves critical to
> achieve maximum gain?

Well, you asked for help, so it is reasonable to assume you are not a
specialist antenna designer. Jim gave you a straightforward solution which
will work. If you want an optimised design, (maximum gain, lowest SWR, max.
bandwidth), you have three possibilities:

buy one
pay a consultant for a custom design
train as an antenna designer.

--
Regards, John Woodgate Tel. [phone]
 Fax [phone] OOO (Own Opinions Only)



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:07 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: [e-mail] (Bill the PotHead)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: UHF Log Periodic Antenna
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 01:21:32 GMT
Organization: High in the Oval Office
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <3276aceb.5773432@204.127.3.4>
References: <3271498a.2910103@204.127.3.4>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.cambridge-1.ma.dial-access.att.net
X-No-Archive: Yes


>Hi,
>I'm trying to design a Log Periodic Antenna
>Frequency range= 300-500 MHz
>Number of Elements= 10
>
>Is there a free program that will generate the element spacings out
>there in the World Wide Web?...TIA
>

www.arrl.org

you can buy The ARRL Antenna Handbook 17th Edition for $30.00
Chapter 10 covers Log Periodic Array...design procedure included,
excellent book!


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:08 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: [e-mail] (Bill the PotHead)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: UHF Log Periodic Antenna
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 01:29:51 GMT
Organization: High in the Oval Office
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <3276aec6.6248526@204.127.3.4>
References: <3271498a.2910103@204.127.3.4> <3276aceb.5773432@204.127.3.4>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.cambridge-1.ma.dial-access.att.net
X-No-Archive: Yes
Xref: news1.epix.net sci.electronics.design:24174 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30714

On Wed, 30 Oct 1996 01:21:32 GMT, [e-mail] (Bill the
PotHead) wrote:

>
>>Hi,
>>I'm trying to design a Log Periodic Antenna
>>Frequency range= 300-500 MHz
>>Number of Elements= 10
>>
>>Is there a free program that will generate the element spacings out
>>there in the World Wide Web?...TIA
>>
>
>www.arrl.org
>
>you can buy The ARRL Antenna Handbook 17th Edition for $30.00
>Chapter 10 covers Log Periodic Array...design procedure included,
>excellent book!

Another excellent book is Log Periodic Antenna Design, by Smith
Electronics, their located in Cleveland Ohio, this book is $29.00
Later doodz...


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:09 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Lance Hagood)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: unsubscribe
Date: 22 Oct 96 13:26:07 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <v01530500ae92358e1e56@[128.83.253.102]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

unsubscribe                                [e-mail]




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:09 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-6.sprintlink.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: Vswr questions
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 17:02:08 -0800
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <1996Oct29.124223.1@aspen>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.102.182
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

[e-mail] wrote:
> What is the formula for taking the Foward vs Reflected power
> readings of swr and turning them into the familiar 1.-:1 ratio?

Hi Dan, Rho, the reflection coefficient is the square root of
the reflected power divided by the forward power. Then SWR
is one plus Rho divided by one minus Rho.

I would borrow another wattmeter to check against yours.

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


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:10 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.structured.net!crusty.teleport.com!nntp0.teleport.com!ip-pdx05-17
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Wanted: Small Efficient 73 kHz antenna Design
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 96 07:48:38 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <54hu6g$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <542or1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx05-17.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <542or1$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Peter Miles) wrote:

>. . .

>I saw in 73 mag a couple of years ago an antenna design that may be able
to be adapted
>to 73khz. A helical wound antenna on nylon rope. A quarter wave section
consisted of a
>half wave length of copper wire wound onto a 12mm nylon rope. The length
of the rope
>is determined by the physical length that you require. However the longer
the quarter
>wave section the greater the efficiency. The antenna may be a vertical or
two quarter
>wave lengths centre feed to form a dipole.
>Hope this may be of use.

Wow, that's a lot of wire. A half wavelength at 73 kHz is about 6700 ft. (2
km).

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:11 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.planetc.com!news.isdn.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Steve Edwards)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WB3U/W7EL/W7XC & OTHERS
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 16:08:42 GMT
Organization: State of Tennessee
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <552leg$[e-mail]>
References: <4nkqp6$[e-mail]> <4nqu4m$[e-mail]> <4nsqhf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hot27.hotcc.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.1/32.230

Cecil Moore <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Cecil Moore <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>I have a Ladder-Line Length Selector
>>remotely switched with 6 4PDT relays that gives me 0-63 ft variable
>>lengths in increments of one foot.

>For anyone looking for cheap relays for ladder-line switching, there's
>a good one in the latest All Electronics catalog (1-800-826-5432).

>Omron LY2-0-DC24 are DPDT rated at 12 amps at 240vac. Their dielectric
>strength is rated at 2000vac. They are priced at $2 each Cat# RLY-145.
>Using 12 of these relays, one can build a 0-63 ft. Ladder-Line Length
>Selector for $24 (plus ladder-line and 6 remote toggle switches).

>IMO, these relays will handle 150 watts with no problem. I'm going
>to try them at 600 watts. Anyone interested in details, email me at
>[e-mail]

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





From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:12 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!zetnet.co.uk!btnet-feed1!news.compulink.co.uk!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Sparks)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Whats the best indoor (small outdoor) antenna for SW reception?
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 19:03:53 GMT
Organization: CIX
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <54lqbk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sparks.compulink.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

I'm interested in knowing the opinons of the readers of the newsgroup
as to which antenna is best suited for my needs. I want to start doing
a little short-wave listening (principally data modes...RTTY/ARQ etc)
but I'll be unable to errect a huge aerial/long wire.

I've considered active indoor types (Datong) and have seen adds for a
vertical folded dipole arrangement (a Miller I think the brand name
was). Has anyone got stong oppinions on these antennas?

Lastly, has anyone got any simple ideas for construction projects?

Thanks in advance
Stuart

PS. I live in a second floor (not top floor) flat so have no roof
space to play with, nor any garden :-((



From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:13 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!cu-dialup-1828.cit.cornell.edu!user
From: [e-mail] (Joel Govostes)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 11:32:39 -0500
Organization: Cornell University
Lines: 21
Sender: [e-mail] (Verified)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cu-dialup-1828.cit.cornell.edu

Here's an antenna question that I've never found an explanation for --

For mobile or fixed station use, a typical vertical antenna is 1/4 wave
and fed with low-impedance coaxial cable.  The ground is provided by earth
ground, automobile body, or a set of "ground plane" elements.  Okay.

This type of antenna matches 50-ohm coax and transmitter output circuits well.

So, who came up with the oddball figure of 5/8 wave for vertical antennas,
and why?

I know that the radiation pattern shape is somewhat "squashed" on the 5/8
wave, and that it provides some gain over the 1/4 wave.  But 5/8
wavelength doesn't match 50 ohm coax feed, and so usually it is fed on a
loading-coil tap at the base of the vertical.

I'm wondering what is so special about the 5/8 wave antenna length; why
not just a 1/2 wave (4/8 wave)?  Could 1/2 wave vertical be fed in a
similar way, and would it also provide significant gain over the 1/4
wave?  Why not just go to 6/8-wave size, as that would match coax feed as
3/4 wave (odd multiple of 1/4 wave ~ approx. 50 ohms.)          Thanks


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:14 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: 27 Oct 1996 16:17:25 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 10
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <550jh5$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

A 5/8 wave OVER A VERY LARGE GROUND PLANE offers 3 dB gain over a 1/4
wave. As you gathered, however, it is NOT a resonant antenna.

With a counterpoise or small GP, very little gain is had (if any) over a
1/4 wave.( I'm not going to play games with one individual on this
matter--play with your own GP and report the results.)

73

Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:14 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 96 23:22:41 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1e.delphi.com
X-To: Joel Govostes <[e-mail]>

Joel Govostes <[e-mail]> writes:

>I'm wondering what is so special about the 5/8 wave antenna length; why

Hi Joel, a 5/8 vertical with a good ground or a 2x5/8 dipole
has the maximum gain available from wire with no other
components. If I remember correctly, a 10/8 wavelength
dipole has 3dB gain over a 1/2 wavelength dipole because
the two main lobes are more concentrated. Above 10/8, a
cloverleaf pattern develops. It's interesting to model
a dipole with a program like EZNEC and gradually increase
the frequency while watching the radiation patterns.

73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:16 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 22:35:40 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 117.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Joel Govostes wrote:
>
> Here's an antenna question that I've never found an explanation for --
>
> For mobile or fixed station use, a typical vertical antenna is 1/4 wave
> and fed with low-impedance coaxial cable.  The ground is provided by earth
> ground, automobile body, or a set of "ground plane" elements.  Okay.
>
> This type of antenna matches 50-ohm coax and transmitter output circuits wel
l.
>
> So, who came up with the oddball figure of 5/8 wave for vertical antennas,
> and why?

ALTAVOZ: your 1/4w is actually odd ball also , its not 1/4w !
so lets call them 1/4w and 1/2w just for convenience , but knowing
that they have been shortened ( 1/4w) and lengthened ( 1/2w) to make
them capacitive ( so a coil will tune either, we dont use caps to tune).
  The current peak on a 1/4w is at the feed point , so the main lobe
is pointing up at a high angle ( not good for horizon reception)
  The current peak on a 1/2w is 1/4 w up the element and points
to the horizon and makes high gain.



>
> I know that the radiation pattern shape is somewhat "squashed" on the 5/8
> wave, and that it provides some gain over the 1/4 wave.  But 5/8
> wavelength doesn't match 50 ohm coax feed, and so usually it is fed on a
> loading-coil tap at the base of the vertical.

altavoz: The coil needed for 5/8w is exactly the same as the coil needed
for the 1/4w .

> I'm wondering what is so special about the 5/8 wave antenna length; why
> not just a 1/2 wave (4/8 wave)?  Could 1/2 wave vertical be fed in a
> similar way, and would it also provide significant gain over the 1/4
> wave?  Why not just go to 6/8-wave size, as that would match coax feed as
> 3/4 wave (odd multiple of 1/4 wave ~ approx. 50 ohms.)          Thanks

altavoz: You cant feed a 1/2w ( 2000+j00) . 3/4w doesnt work
( lobe is too high , worse than 1/4w )
 Next we'll do an "L" network ( its just a single coil, but fed in
center makes it 2 coils) to match the 200-J100 antenna.
BTW the J pole doesnt work ( bad grnd plane )


______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:16 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!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: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 08:56:51 -0800
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <550jh5$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.102.182
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

altavoz wrote:
> altavoz: 1/4w antennas are allways shorter than 1/4w to allow
> an inexpensive coil to tune it to resonance.

Hi Altavoz, Most prudent people avoid blanket statements using
the words, "always", "never", etc. because they are almost
always false. Both my 10m whip and 2m whip are 1/4 WL and
resonant without loading coils.

I would agree that most CB antennas are shorter than 1/4w...

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


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:17 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-15.sprintlink.net!super.zippo.com!zdc-e!feed1.news.erols.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 19:03:21 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <550jh5$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 102.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Cecil Moore wrote:
>
> altavoz wrote:
> > altavoz: 1/4w antennas are allways shorter than 1/4w to allow
> > an inexpensive coil to tune it to resonance.
>
> Hi Altavoz, Most prudent people avoid blanket statements using
> the words, "always", "never", etc. because they are almost
> always false. Both my 10m whip and 2m whip are 1/4 WL and
> resonant without loading coils.
>
> I would agree that most CB antennas are shorter than 1/4w...
>
> 73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)

altavoz: I know what im talking about , so i made the absolute
statement , and i stand by it . Between .25w and .5w you'll need
a cap to tune and caps are expensive , so why not not just jump
to .6w and a coil does it and the 2nd lobe isnt significant.
  What you're not looking at is the pattern (gain). .25w
pattern is trash.

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:18 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.fibr.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!hammer.uoregon.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] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: 28 Oct 1996 22:19:54 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 6
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <553t4q$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

 The coils are used to LOAD the antenna to resonance.

Again, a 5/8 has no benefit unless placed on a LARGE ground plane.

73
Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:19 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-200.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.telalink.net!telalink!news.wildstar.net!news.sdsmt.edu!news.mid.net!mr.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.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: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: 29 Oct 1996 01:00:13 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard Corvallis Site
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <553kut$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hplsnb.lsid.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL9.4]

altavoz ([e-mail]) wrote:

: ALTAVOZ: your 1/4w is actually odd ball also , its not 1/4w !

..

: altavoz: The coil needed for 5/8w is exactly the same as the coil needed
: for the 1/4w .

..

: altavoz: You cant feed a 1/2w ( 2000+j00) . 3/4w doesnt work
: ( lobe is too high , worse than 1/4w )

Gee, absolute statements like these are just about sure flame-bait in
this group.

I'll just note:

1.  A radiator a bit longer than 1/4 wave fed against a ground plane
    allows a simple series capacitor to match nicely to 50 ohms.

2.  Therefore, clearly the "coil needed for 5/8w" is not exactly
    the same as the coil needed for 1/4w, since a coil is not
    necessarily needed in either case.  Depends on what you are
    doing.

3.  You think I can't feed 2000+j0 ohms??  Hah.

--
Cheers,
Tom
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:20 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!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: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: 29 Oct 1996 13:44:43 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 24
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <555jar$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

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

>altavoz: I know what im talking about , so i made the absolute
>statement , and i stand by it . Between .25w and .5w you'll need
>a cap to tune and caps are expensive , so why not not just jump
>to .6w and a coil does it and the 2nd lobe isnt significant.
>  What you're not looking at is the pattern (gain). .25w
>pattern is trash.

Actually the minor lobe of a 5/8 wl is not insignificant, that's why most
broadcast stations abandoned them by the 30's. On sky wave, the minor lobe
arrives back on earth and interferes with the desired signal from the main
lobe, and gives rise to severe fading.

A 5/8 wl antenna ONLY acheives its' gain when over a very very large
groundplane, several wavelengths of near perfect ground. Without the large
perfectly reflecting ground, the 5/8 wl has about the same or slightly
LESS gain than a 1/2 wl with no reflecting ground.

Any slight matching advantage in matching is offset by these
disadvantages.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:22 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 12:13:19 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <550jh5$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 140.los-angeles-007.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Cecil Moore wrote:
>
> altavoz <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> >> > altavoz: 1/4w antennas are allways shorter than 1/4w to allow
> >> > an inexpensive coil to tune it to resonance.
>
>
> >altavoz: I know what im talking about , so i made the absolute
> >statement , and i stand by it . Between .25w and .5w you'll need
>
> If there is a single 1/4 WL antenna in the universe that is
> not shorter than 1/4 WL then your statement is false. I
> personally have two of them each centered at a certain
> frequency. Below the center frequency, they are slightly
> capacitive and above the center frequency, they are
> slightly inductive. So what? No coil and no cap are
> required so a 1/4 WL antenna is less expensive than
> your short, coil-loaded less-than 1/4 WL antenna. I'm
> not certain, but I think a 1/4 WL antenna has gain over
> anything shorter than 1/4 WL and loading coils dissipate
> power that would otherwise be radiated as RF.
>
> 73, Cecil, W6RCA

altavoz: You are too theorectical, not practical, you need
experience . You need to learn patterns and main lobes.
 The .25w ant is poor gain . The .6w ant has much higher gain.
You got to be very desparate to pull CONJUGATE from theoretical
amthematics over to antennas/xmission lines just to win an
argument !!  BUT YOU HAVE A STINKING ATTITUDE TOWARDS LEARNING.


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:22 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: 29 Oct 1996 18:53:14 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 5
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <5565da$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Actually, I have found Cecil to be thoughtful, reasonable, and open
minded; I find his attitude refreshing.

73
Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:24 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.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!ae517
From: [e-mail] (Russ Renaud)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: 29 Oct 1996 13:27:43 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 24
Sender: [e-mail] (Russ Renaud)
Message-ID: <5550of$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <550jh5$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Russ Renaud)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet2.carleton.ca


altavoz ([e-mail]) writes:

>> > altavoz: 1/4w antennas are allways shorter than 1/4w to allow
>> > an inexpensive coil to tune it to resonance.
>>
>> Hi Altavoz, Most prudent people avoid blanket statements using
>> the words, "always", "never", etc. because they are almost
>> always false. Both my 10m whip and 2m whip are 1/4 WL and
>> resonant without loading coils.
>>
>> I would agree that most CB antennas are shorter than 1/4w...
>>
>> 73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)
>
> altavoz: I know what im talking about , so i made the absolute
> statement , and i stand by it . Between .25w and .5w you'll need

I have two commercial mobile 1/4 wave antennas, and neither have coils
nor capacitors.  One is for the 2 metre amateur band, the other
is UHF low band.  Perhaps you're confusing shortened whips with
those typically used on CB.




From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:24 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!metro.atlanta.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-10.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-9.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 16:21:14 -0800
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <550jh5$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.102.182
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

altavoz wrote:
> altavoz: You are too theorectical, not practical, you need
> experience . You need to learn patterns and main lobes.

I need 2 aspirin and a double scotch.

73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:25 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 12:15:53 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <553t4q$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 140.los-angeles-007.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Fractenna wrote:
>
>  The coils are used to LOAD the antenna to resonance.
>
> Again, a 5/8 has no benefit unless placed on a LARGE ground plane.
>
> 73
> Chip N1IR

altavoz: WRONG. It needs it's own .6w gnd plane , not a large
gnd plain. And few antennas "benefit" unless on a gnd plain,
either 90 deg or 120 deg or 180 deg( best ).
The .6w vert' has the most bang/buck of any ant' .
--

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:26 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!panix!newsfeed.internetmci.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 19:47:46 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <5565hp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 144.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Fractenna wrote:
>
> Hey alatavoz, you are wrong.
>
> You need a sizeable GP to get the 3 dB gain.

altavoz: You need an exact GP not a sizeable one at .6w

> Also, I have a 1/4 wave vertical on 3 radials--and that works without a
> ground plane. Its called a 'counterpoise'.

altavoz: DUH , a counterpoise is a gnd plane .

> Speaking of attitudes, you do seem to have one.
>
> Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:27 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: 29 Oct 1996 18:55:37 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 10
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <5565hp$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hey alatavoz, you are wrong.

You need a sizeable GP to get the 3 dB gain.

Also, I have a 1/4 wave vertical on 3 radials--and that works without a
ground plane. Its called a 'counterpoise'.

Speaking of attitudes, you do seem to have one.

Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:28 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!metro.atlanta.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-10.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 16:46:10 -0800
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <550jh5$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <5550of$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.102.182
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

altavoz wrote:
> altavoz: It's there , you are too inexperienced to spot it.

Does anybody else suspect a practical joker in our midst?
Maybe even one of the regulars willing to open a new account
for a free trial period?

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


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:29 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!arclight.uoregon.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 12:07:13 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <553kut$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 140.los-angeles-007.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Tom Bruhns wrote:
> altavoz ([e-mail]) wrote:
> : ALTAVOZ: your 1/4w is actually odd ball also , its not 1/4w !
> : altavoz: The coil needed for 5/8w is exactly the same as the coil needed
> : for the 1/4w .
> : altavoz: You cant feed a 1/2w ( 2000+j00) . 3/4w doesnt work
> : ( lobe is too high , worse than 1/4w )

> Gee, absolute statements like these are just about sure flame-bait in
> this group.

altavoz: Thats cause they're idiots , they'd argue anything , and
learn nothing.

> 1.  A radiator a bit longer than 1/4 wave fed against a ground plane
>     allows a simple series capacitor to match nicely to 50 ohms.

altavoz: SIMPLE CAPACITOR $$$$  You're an idiot ! More important
whats the pattern like? I notice you bookworms never talk of pattern.

>
> 2.  Therefore, clearly the "coil needed for 5/8w" is not exactly
>     the same as the coil needed for 1/4w, since a coil is not
>     necessarily needed in either case.  Depends on what you are
>     doing.altavoz: WRONG , you need a coil for both .

>
> 3.  You think I can't feed 2000+j0 ohms??  Hah.
> Tom [e-mail]

altavoz: I'll prove you wrong by JASIK,BROWN,LEE
You're going on my list " people who dont know and cant learn"
You must be a college grad !


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:31 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsgate.compuserve.com!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 19:52:38 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <555jar$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 144.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

W8JI Tom wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, altavoz
> <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> >altavoz: I know what im talking about , so i made the absolute
> >statement , and i stand by it . Between .25w and .5w you'll need
> >a cap to tune and caps are expensive , so why not not just jump
> >to .6w and a coil does it and the 2nd lobe isnt significant.
> >  What you're not looking at is the pattern (gain). .25w
> >pattern is trash.
>
> Actually the minor lobe of a 5/8 wl is not insignificant, that's why most
> broadcast stations abandoned them by the 30's. On sky wave, the minor lobe
> arrives back on earth and interferes with the desired signal from the main
> lobe, and gives rise to severe fading.

altavoz: FALSE .
>
> A 5/8 wl antenna ONLY acheives its' gain when over a very very large
> groundplane, several wavelengths of near perfect ground. Without the large
> perfectly reflecting ground, the 5/8 wl has about the same or slightly
> LESS gain than a 1/2 wl with no reflecting ground.

altavoz: FALSE , a .6w ant needs exactly .6 radials(current pk at .35w)
 , a .25w requires anything over .1w radials as it's current peak is
at the feedpoint(you only need radials at the current loop)

> Any slight matching advantage in matching is offset by these
> disadvantages.
>
> 73 Tom

altavoz: GO BACK TO SCHOOL !


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:33 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsgate.compuserve.com!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 19:54:15 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <555jar$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 144.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

W8JI Tom wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, altavoz
> <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> >altavoz: I know what im talking about , so i made the absolute
> >statement , and i stand by it . Between .25w and .5w you'll need
> >a cap to tune and caps are expensive , so why not not just jump
> >to .6w and a coil does it and the 2nd lobe isnt significant.
> >  What you're not looking at is the pattern (gain). .25w
> >pattern is trash.
>
> Actually the minor lobe of a 5/8 wl is not insignificant, that's why most
> broadcast stations abandoned them by the 30's. On sky wave, the minor lobe
> arrives back on earth and interferes with the desired signal from the main
> lobe, and gives rise to severe fading.
>
> A 5/8 wl antenna ONLY acheives its' gain when over a very very large
> groundplane, several wavelengths of near perfect ground. Without the large
> perfectly reflecting ground, the 5/8 wl has about the same or slightly
> LESS gain than a 1/2 wl with no reflecting ground.
>
> Any slight matching advantage in matching is offset by these
> disadvantages.
>
> 73 Tom

altavoz: Read Paul H. Lee page 84 "Am' Rad' Vert' Ant' HB"
As he proves you must have a counterpoise for a 1/2w ant.
A J POLE DOESNT WORK ! IT HAS POOR LOW ANGLE RADIATION .
He says " Actualy the 5/8w vert is better than the 1/2
vert from the standpoints of low angle radiation and feedpoint
impedance.."


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:34 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!newsfeed.concentric.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (A N Thompson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Wire for Beverages
Date: 26 Oct 96 22:10:20 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Does anyone have some suggestions for a source of
reasonably priced wire for some Beverage antennas
(we're talking about 10,000 + ft of wire)?

Thanks & 73,

Arliss    W7XU
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:34 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!snunews.snu.ac.kr!hammer.uoregon.edu!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!iglou!iglou.com!n4lq
From: [e-mail] (Steve Ellington)
Subject: Re: Wire for Beverages
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: iglou1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News Administrator)
Organization: IgLou Internet Services (1-800-436-4456)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 22:01:57 GMT
Lines: 18

Visit your local farm supply store. I bought a 1/2 mile spool of #17 ga
aluminum wire for my loop. It works great. It tends not to break due to
it's light weight and cost was only about $35.



A N Thompson ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Does anyone have some suggestions for a source of
: reasonably priced wire for some Beverage antennas
: (we're talking about 10,000 + ft of wire)?

: Thanks & 73,

: Arliss    W7XU
: [e-mail]

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


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:35 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!fu-berlin.de!unlisys!news.maz.net!news.allcon.net!jgfl1!griffin
From: [e-mail] (Jens Goerke)
Subject: Wok as reflector?
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Organization: Private Multi-Site
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 19:31:46 GMT
Lines: 10

Hi, all!

No, this is not a joke. I was just watching a japanese movie
(Tampopo) and the thought of using a wok as a reflector for
UHF or as a parabolic antenna for 10GHz came to me.
Has anybody ever tried it?

73, Jens, DB9LL
--
What _was_ your username again? <clickety clickety click>


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:36 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.inc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.icix.net!news.gate.net!nntp.seflin.lib.fl.us!a043971t
From: [e-mail] (Joey Solomon)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: wtb ringo ranger AR-2 or ARX-2
Date: 27 Oct 1996 01:03:51 GMT
Organization: SEFLIN Free-Net - Broward
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <54ucdn$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Hello all.
I am looking for an AR-2 or Arx 2.  I really want one,.  Thanks every
one.

--
KF4MKU
 /\/\/\/\
|       |
| () () |  DUH?
|   _\  |
|       |
|  \__/ |
\       /
 \_____/     73's and have a nice day :-)



(Joey Solomon)
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:37 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!xara.net!emerald.xara.net!Aladdin!innotts.co.uk!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jeremy Boot)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy
Subject: WWW Pages
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 07:37:19 GMT
Organization: innotts.co.uk
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: seriale19.innotts.co.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.299
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30391 rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:19767 rec.radio.amateur.dx:1144 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41136 rec.radio.amateur.misc:116936 rec.radio.amateur.policy:42185

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
The G4NJH Radio Pages
==================

        http://www.innotts.co.uk/~asperges/

Nearly 22,000 visitors and growing...

* Pages for old and new enthusiasts.
* Friendly - not just a collection of links;
* Updated for November 96; New layout;
* SWL, Scanners, Amateurs, Students, Novices, links, narrative;
* News, views, contests, Computers and Internet, New QSL project,
* RSGB, UKRS, even Burns, Wollaton Park and St George -
* Link to the new Guy Fawkes site! .......

73 de Jeremy G4NJH
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------


From [e-mail] Wed Oct 30 06:23:38 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!ott.istar!istar.net!tor.istar!east.istar!n2tor.istar!gtnews.golden.org!usenet
From: Rich Fortnum <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Yagi, coupling, design Q's
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 11:55:09 -0500
Organization: F&M Breweries, Guelph, CANADA
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: cisco2-87.golden.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Macintosh; I; PPC)

I want to make a 5 element Yagi for 6 meters, SSB.  I have seen some
diagrams that use couplings that are made of metal, to attach the
elements to the boom, but this confuses me.

Wouldn't using metal make the whole antenna active, and not just the
driven element?  What are commonly used items to attach elements to the
boom?  How is the feedline attached to the driven element?  Must I use
some kind of 'match'?

Cheers.  Please cc: to e-mail.
--

Rich Fortnum (aka BeeRich) [e-mail] VA3 RFZ
F&M Breweries, Guelph, Ontario, Canada
Renaissance Brewers of Fine Ales and Lagers
THE ONTARIO BEER PAGE http://www.pints.com


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:23 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!EU.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!ultranews.duc.auburn.edu!news.fsu.edu!nntp.cntfl.com!usenet
From: Joe Leikhim <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: (no subject)
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 01:39:40 -0500
Organization: CMDS News machine
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp048.nettally.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; U)

add [e-mail]
--
Joe Leikhim
[e-mail]
"tv dinner by the pool,
i'm so glad i finished school"-F.Zappa 1967




From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:24 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.erols.net!news.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsgate.compuserve.com!news.production.compuserve.com!news
From: Felix <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: Balloon-borne antenna?
Date: 27 Oct 1996 19:39:15 GMT
Organization: CompuServe, Inc. (1-800-689-0736)
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <550dp3$5i3$[e-mail]>
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:31066 rec.radio.shortwave:87928

What's a good source of infor on balloon-borne antennas for receiving?
I'm thinking of a DXpedition to a coastal location and wondering how
much difference a few hundred feet of vertical wire could make.
Interested in receiving only, but everything from 30 MHz down to
the ground. Presumably LF and VLF is where it would really make the
difference. Can anybody advise me based on experience? Thanks!
--
Felix


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:25 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!hammer.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!waikato!wolfman.xtra.co.nz![e-mail]
From: Paul Smith <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How to build a 800MHz Yagi?
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 17:04:01 +1200
Organization: Customer of Telecom Internet Services
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 202.27.178.110
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E-XTRA  (Win95; I)

R Ho wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I wish to build a 830MHz 6 element data transmission YAGI myself.
>
> Can anyone tell me how to build one. It would be nice if someone
>
> can supply me with the specification of such Yagi (e.g. the
>
> element position from rear of boom, element length.....e.t.c.).
>
> Is there anything special about the driven element of 800MHz
>
> Yagi? Do we build them the same way as building a 2 Meters
>
> band Yagi?
>
> Thank you
>
> Mr R Ho (AK)
> [e-mail]
> 14-Oct-96

Take a design for a 430 (70cm) Yagi and scale it down to suit.  About
+/- 50% should do.


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:26 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.wildstar.net!newsfeed.telalink.net!telalink!lurch.sccsi.com!news.sccsi.com!nuchat!mike.sccsi.com!mike
From: [e-mail] (Dr. Michael Hunter)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Antenna Paint
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 19:10:41
Organization: South Coast Computing Services
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mike.sccsi.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev A]

Need to hide my R 7 vertical antenna from the home owners association. Wonder
if there is any type of black paint that could be used on the aluminum antenna

that will not distort the performance?

Mike [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:28 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.alfred.edu!clicnet!news.clic.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!n3ott.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!n1van.istar!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.msfc.nasa.gov!news.sgi.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: Merv Stump <[e-mail]@postoffice.worldnet.att.net>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: phased verticals
Date: 29 Oct 1996 14:25:38 GMT
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <555452$[e-mail]>
References: <01bbc53e$78d52760$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 34.new-york-011.ny.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)

From your posting it sounds as if you are using 2 verticals spaced 1/4
wave apart and attempting to feed them 90 degrees out of phase.  Two
points to be considered.  1.  If you look at the patter in the ARRL
Handbook (or else where) you will see that the front to back at exactly
180 from the main lobe is quite exceptional.  However, if you look
carefully you will note that even slightly off the main axis your front to
back is not nearly so good as you thought.  This may account for what you
describe as a poorly defined pattern.  I once used this system, and found
that on about one time out of 100 someone would give me a phenominal front
to back report.  The rest of the time was so so.

Point 2.  Assuming that you are doing your phasing with coaxial lag lines,
I would suggest that you cut the lag line to about 73 degrees instead of
90.  ON4UN explains this in his book, "Lowband DXing".  I've tried it and
it does improve things considerably.

By the way, I gave up and bought the ComTek box.  It's well worth the
money.

Regards, Merv



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:29 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!panix!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!newsspool.doit.wisc.edu!night.primate.wisc.edu!nntp.msstate.edu!news.memphis.edu!news.wku.edu!axp1.wku.edu!scottcr
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Goniometer feed for bal line ?
Date: 29 Oct 96 13:08:02 CST
Organization: Western Kentucky University
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <1996Oct29.130802@axp1>
NNTP-Posting-Host: axp1.wku.edu

I am building a no-compromise 105 foot dipole fed with true open
wire line ( 2" spaced ceramic insulators every 18", with #8 wire, up
about 80 feet).

Many people seem to feed balanced line with an internal or external 4:1
balun (usually ferrite or powdered iron toroidial core).  I read that
this is less than optimum due to operating the balun outside of its
useful impedance range.

The classic arrangement of a resonant transformer type tuner with either
goniometer or series capacitor coupling control appears to be the best
arrangement, but seems to be a lot more trouble;  As a practical matter,
does the balun feed work well?

--
WB9NEQ
[e-mail]  Chief Engineer, Public Radio- Western KY U
                     Telco: [phone]  Hm & Fax: [phone]
...just another insignificant VAX user.        \\\//
                                               (o o)
--------------------------------------------ooO-(_)-Ooo-----------------------



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:30 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 12:16:54 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <550jh5$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <5550of$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 140.los-angeles-007.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Russ Renaud wrote:
>
> altavoz ([e-mail]) writes:
>
> >> > altavoz: 1/4w antennas are allways shorter than 1/4w to allow
> >> > an inexpensive coil to tune it to resonance.
> >>
> >> Hi Altavoz, Most prudent people avoid blanket statements using
> >> the words, "always", "never", etc. because they are almost
> >> always false. Both my 10m whip and 2m whip are 1/4 WL and
> >> resonant without loading coils.
> >>
> >> I would agree that most CB antennas are shorter than 1/4w...
> >>
> >> 73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)
> >
> > altavoz: I know what im talking about , so i made the absolute
> > statement , and i stand by it . Between .25w and .5w you'll need
>
> I have two commercial mobile 1/4 wave antennas, and neither have coils
> nor capacitors.  One is for the 2 metre amateur band, the other
> is UHF low band.  Perhaps you're confusing shortened whips with
> those typically used on CB.

altavoz: It's there , you are too inexperienced to spot it.
--

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:31 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-13.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-chi-8.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 5/8's antennas & coax matching sections
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 20:54:55 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 144.san-francisco-003.ca.dial-access.att.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

[e-mail] wrote:
>
> Thanks Jim, for reiterating my point on the gain. Few people realize that
> a 5/8 needs a substantial GP to afford any gain.
>
> 73
> Chip N1IRaltavoz: It does not need this vague "substantial GP"
it needs a .625wl GP . You need to read BROWN .
There is little diff between a radiating element and
a radial ( especially at .5-.625wl) .
  The current peak is at .01wl( .25wl antenna) on both radiating
elements and .35wl( .6wl antenna) on both elements .
  Trim the .25wl antenna radial and you'll see little change.
Trim the .6wl antenna radial even .1wl and you're in big trouble.
It drasticaly alters the lobe, and changes the SWR big time.
The reason for this is in the chart of the approach to a .5wl
antenna , it's extremely steep . The .25wl antenna is 10 times
lower Q !

  A .5wl antenna needs a .5wl radial .


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:32 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!news.uoregon.edu!news.efn.org!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Dick Hughes)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Specs for Screwdriver Antenna
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 05:09:48 GMT
Organization: Oregon Public Networking
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <5561gf$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dynip129.efn.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.299

On Mon, 28 Oct 96 22:56:54 GMT, [e-mail] (David Wood) wrote:

>Can anybody let me know where I can get the specs
>to put together a "Screwdriver" antenna ?
>
>D.Wood for G.O.Wood/VE3PXH: [e-mail]
>
>

Find a copy of "40+5 Years of HF Mobileering" by Don Johnson, W6AAQ.
It is a Worldradio Book, if that helps.  They are in Sacramento, CA.
You might also try Big DK Publishing Company, P.O. Box 595, Esparto,
CA 95627-0595.  Don is generally considered the father of the
screwdriver antenna, although some would disagree.

Dick Hughes - W6CCD



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:34 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!newspump.sol.net!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!qualcomm.com!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Peter Markham)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: CTHA
Date: 30 Oct 96 05:39:06 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <9610311516.AA16979@btc1>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]


Subject:       Re: Contrawound Toroidal Helical Antenna (CTHA)
Date:          Mon, 28 Oct 1996 08:24:22 -0400

  It was posted....

Greetings,
 I posted to this group a while back regarding the Contrawound Toroidal
Helical Antenna and promised to keep those interested in it's development
updated. Attached is a recent news release that you may find of interest.
 Regards,
 C.D.Sage

Most deleted ......

                           Questions or Comments?

   I have never read such a release that was not an April 1 article.
   The GAP and Maxcom advertising does not compare to this masterpiece.
   Merlin would be impressed.

   What really hurts is that all the research, time, and expense I
 have invested in my new satellite antenna setup has been flushed
 with one news release.

   Tom, what kind of oyle was that? Will it make my stuff work like
theirs?

                                             Pete/wa4hei



  The meek will not inherit the Earth.


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:35 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!netnews.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [e-mail](Anthony Severdia)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How to Build A Rhombic?
Date: 30 Oct 1996 06:33:37 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Lines: 58
Message-ID: <556ss1$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <554ff0$[e-mail]> <555csc$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ala-ca8-02.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Wed Oct 30 12:33:37 AM CST 1996

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dick Hughes)
writes:
>
>On 29 Oct 1996 16:54:36 GMT, [e-mail] wrote:
>
>>In <554ff0$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
writes:
>>>In article <[e-mail]>,
>>>Lundgren William E <[e-mail]> writes:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>    I've heard so much about what a great antenna they are
(provided yo
>>>>have the room) and that they perform very well.  My only question
is does
>>>>anyone know the formula to build one, has anyone built one, and
what
>>>>exactly do you need for support, feeding, etc.  Any infor anyone
has
>>>>would be appreciated.
>>>>
>>
>>>The real advantage of a Rhombic is simple construction and
bandwidth, not
>>>gain. You can get more gain in much less space with many antennas,
>>>including the smaller curtains used at VOA.
>>>
>>>73 Tom
>>
>>Which is EXACTLY why the VOA supplanted them with the curtains.  I
wish
>>all our government's decisions were that well made.
>>
>>  :)
>>
>>//-----------------------------
>>Mike - W5WQN
>
>
>Yes, but there was something really satisfying about the rhombics used
>at W6AM when they burned holes through the ether.  I think they had
>something like 8 wave-lengths per leg.  When he hit the switch back in
>the AM days, you had to have everything nailed down in your shack.
>
>Dick Hughes - W6CCD

    Dick, you remember that period?  <g> I do too and W6AM was a real
power house in CA.  What was his name? ....Smith or maybe Tibbets?

    FWIW, there is a major shortwave installation outside of
Okeechobee Florida that uses about 10 rhombics.  Plus others:
4 curtains and 2 log periodics.  All this is contained in about
one mile square in grazing and near swampland. Oh, plus 14 100 KW
transmitters!  Rhombics are NOT passe as some have suggested.  (some
writers have insisted).  They do have certain advantages.

    -=Tony=-    W6ANV       San Francisco, CA



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:36 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-ana-24.sprintlink.net!news.azstarnet.com!usr11ip8.azstarnet.com!n7ws
From: [e-mail] (Wes Stewart)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Contrawound Toroidal Helical Antenna (CTHA)
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 06:42:36 LOCAL
Organization: Starnet
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <555k43$[e-mail]> <5562ge$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: usr11ip8.azstarnet.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4]

In article <5562ge$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Fractenna) wr
ites:
>From: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
>Subject: Re: Contrawound Toroidal Helical Antenna (CTHA)
>Date: 29 Oct 1996 18:03:42 -0500

>Tom, you really need to get a life.

>Go explore your 'magic' elsewhere.

>The newsgroup is sick of you harping on this and I have been very
>forthcoming in answering questions via e-mail. So take the admonitions of
>OTHERS--they're sick of your prattle. ANd there's hours of answers
>already.

>Chip

I've been pretty busy lately, so I don't have time for a lot of "prattle".
Consequently, I've set my newsreader to list by author's name.  I ALWAYS read
Tom, Roy, Charlie, Forrest and Sabin.  You on the other hand...

N7WS


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:37 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: [e-mail] (Rich McAllister)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.space
Subject: Re: New 'N' Connectors OK?
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Date: 29 Oct 1996 23:51:23 -0800
Organization: ARS KO6CL
Lines: 24
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbc4e5$8f923820$aaecbdcc@rsmith>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.san-francisco-008.ca.dial-access.att.net
In-reply-to: "Bob Smith"'s message of 28 Oct 1996 15:34:53 GMT
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.1
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30730 rec.radio.amateur.space:8681

In article <01bbc4e5$8f923820$aaecbdcc@rsmith> "Bob Smith" <[e-mail]> wr
ites:

> Are those new N connectors that look like PL259's OK.  I have a few and
> they pretty easy to work with.  But then again the standard ones now seem
> just as easy to use.

Well, I have no data on how well they work, but I've decided I don't
like 'em.  Usually I'm putting Ns on 9913 and with that skimpy spiral
poly dielectric the last thing I want to do is apply heat to solder
the braid.

So I'm back to the old types.  Now, the problem with the old type is
sometimes after I put them on the connector is "loose", that is I can
hold the coax in one hand and the connnector in the other and twist,
and the connector moves.  Connections like this "seem" to work OK
until the connector falls off, but that usually is only a few hours
later.  Sometimes, the connector is on nice and tight and stays that
way.  My question is, what is it I did wrong with the ones that are
loose?

Rich, KO6CL

--
Rich McAllister, KO6CL, [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:38 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: [e-mail] (Rich McAllister)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: RE:9913 N connectors
Date: 29 Oct 1996 23:59:34 -0800
Organization: ARS KO6CL
Lines: 12
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.san-francisco-008.ca.dial-access.att.net
In-reply-to: [e-mail]'s message of 29 Oct 96 08:05:48 GMT
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.1

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rick Markey)
 writes:

>  As far as I know, Kings is the only
> company that makes an N connector that will fit 9913.  It's a crimp type

I bought a bunch of clamp type Ns with big pins from Pasternack last
year, they're still in the catalog.  Now what I've never seen
but would like are "captive contact" types with big pins.

Rich
--
Rich McAllister, KO6CL, [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:38 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!news.sgi.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!pacbell.com!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  antenna in the power lines !!!!!"
Date: 30 Oct 96 09:44:32 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

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


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:39 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!demos!Gamma.RU!srcc!news.uni-stuttgart.de!moritz
From: [e-mail] ()
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How do you measure radiation resistance?
Date: 30 Oct 1996 12:21:54 GMT
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <557h92$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipers1.e-technik.uni-stuttgart.de

>Can anyone explain how to go about measuring an antenna's
>radiation resistance? I have several designs where the
>feed point resistance is not the same as the radiation
>resistance but I've never seen anything written on how
>to go about determining what the radiation resitance is.

Hi Ed,

If you look at the definition of the radiation resistance,
you will find why it is difficult to measure:

The radiation resistance is the total power radiated divided by the square
of the current causing the radiation. The practical way how to measure the
total current is to measure the current in the currrent maximum, make
reasonable assumptions as to the current distribution along the antenna
(sinusoidal) and then integrate over the length of the antenna.

73, Moritz DL5UH




From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:40 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news4.agis.net!agis!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newspump.sol.net!news.mindspring.com!mindspring!uunet!in1.uu.net!delphi.com!usenet
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 96 07:27:04 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail] <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1d.delphi.com
X-To: altavoz <[e-mail]>

altavoz <[e-mail]> writes:

>altavoz: page 16-11 ARRl " Conjugate matching is obtained
>thru a controlled wave interference between 2 sets of
>reflected waves.."

Hi Altavoz, wonder if you understand your quotes. In my
example there is a controlled wave interference between
two sets of reflected waves in the 75 ohm coax. One set
sees the 50 ohm load impedance and the other set sees
a virtual open or short circuit at the impedance bump
a half-wavelength away. That, my friend, is a conjugate
match in anybody's book. All it takes for a conjugate
match is to see conjugates looking both directions up
and down a transmission line. 50+j0 and 50-j0 satisfies
that requirement.

73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:41 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsserv.freeway.net!news
From: <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: re phased verticals
Date: 30 Oct 1996 12:29:31 GMT
Organization: ken cubilo electric
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <01bbc65e$30318dc0$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm7-28.freeway.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155

thanks to all that sent info on the above and pointed
me in the direction of the book low band dxing.i went
ahead and ordered it last night so hopefully it will
get me cooking here
73 ken we8w



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:42 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!demos!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!qualcomm.com!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Dick Boley)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Altavoz et al.
Date: 30 Oct 96 13:24:58 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]


I think that Altavoz is pulling your collective chains and getting some
borderline personalities to cross the demarcation that seperates civil
behaviors from the demented stuff we hear on 20m & 80m. I suggest
that you all rewind and try to start afresh with a new topic, not one where
someone continually skirts reality just to get a rise out of you.

The intensity of responses flashing back and forth is ruining this group
for those that do not share your love for words like stupid, idiot, and
"worse". Too many people hide behind the Berkeley phrase of the 90's -
FLAMING - for child-like responses. It is simply something that no one
should tolerate, nor participate in.

Dick  N3HKN  Pittsburgh, PA.




From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:44 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!ott.istar!istar.net!news.achilles.net!neoucom.edu!kraken!redpoll!red
Newsgroups: alt.retromod,alt.animals.felines,ca.jobs,comp.databases.ms-access,comp.music.midi,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.cd-rom,comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard.tech,la.jobs,misc.jobs,misc.jobs.offered,rec.arts.startrek.misc,rec.autos.marketplace,rec.music.phish,rec.pets.cats,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.space,sci.electronics.basics,sci.engr.electrical.compliance
Subject: Re: bincancel:18 large binaries:AR677:@@NCM
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 13:41:41 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Richard E. Depew)
Followup-To: news.admin.net-abuse.misc
Organization: ARMM Services, Bincancel Division
Keywords: ARMM - Automated Retroactive Minimal Moderation
Lines: 72
Xref: news1.epix.net alt.animals.felines:18043 comp.databases.ms-access:117970 comp.music.midi:15782 comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.cd-rom:39834 comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard.tech:45425 la.jobs:99293 misc.jobs.offered:1568835 rec.arts.startrek.misc:104909 rec.autos.marketplace:74436 rec.music.phish:189460 rec.pets.cats:227633 rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30743 rec.radio.amateur.space:8683 sci.electronics.basics:15390 sci.engr.electrical.compliance:1343

Large binary posts do not belong in unmoderated discussion groups.

I run a program that searches for, and issues advisory cancels for,
large binaries in the akr, biz, comp, misc, news, rec, and sci
hierarchies.

I have issued 18 cancels for large binary files (average size 215,818
characters - total size 3,884,723 characters) posted to 14 different
unmoderated discussion groups in the comp, misc, rec, and sci
hierarchies (with cross-posts into alt, ca, and la groups) as follows:
   3 rec.autos.marketplace
   2 sci.engr.electrical.compliance
   2 rec.arts.startrek.misc
   2 comp.sys.ibm.pc.soundcard.tech
   1 sci.electronics.basics
   1 rec.radio.amateur.space
   1 rec.radio.amateur.antenna
   1 rec.pets.cats
        alt.animals.felines
   1 rec.music.phish
   1 comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.cd-rom
   1 comp.music.midi
   1 comp.databases.ms-access
   1 ca.jobs
        la.jobs
        misc.jobs
        misc.jobs.offered

The cancels in non-targeted groups are a consequence of the way
cross-posts work.  A cross-posted article has only one Message-ID.
When it is canceled from one group it is canceled from all groups.

This pointer is being posted to each affected group listed above.
Follow-ups are directed to news.admin.net-abuse.misc.

If you want to see exactly which file was deleted from a particular
group, read the full report in news.admin.net-abuse.announce.  The
full report can also be found in alt.nocem.misc and alt.retromod.
Look for AR677 in the subject, or, if your reader supports it, use
this <URL:news:[e-mail]>

The criteria used to search for this batch of large binaries were:
   NEWSGROUPS: Unmoderated akr, biz, comp, misc, news, rec, or sci
               (except for comp.binaries.apple2, comp.bugs.2bsd,
                and rec.games.bolo)
   BINARY: base64, binhex, uuencode, and xbtoa encoded files, etc.
   SIZE: > 100,000 characters [(size * (# of parts - .5)), if multi-part]

If you must post a binary to Usenet, please post it *only* to an
appropriate binaries newsgroup such as alt.binaries.misc, and do *not*
crosspost it to non-binaries groups.  Then, if you like, post something
in the appropriate discussion group telling people where to find the
binary in the binaries group (a pointer to the binary).  This will
permit news administrators and users to decide for themselves whether
to receive the binary files.

For more information about binary cancels, see the bincancel FAQ,
<URL:http://ursula.uoregon.edu/~geniac/binfaq.txt>.

Please direct public feedback to news.admin.net-abuse.misc and private
feedback to [e-mail].  In the interests of preventing
cross-posted flame wars, please honor the followup-to header and do
*not* cross-post your reply to multiple groups.  Thanks for your
cooperation.

Best wishes,
Dick
--
Richard E. Depew, Munroe Falls, OH    [e-mail] (home)
It's over, and can't be helped, and that's one consolation, as they
  always say in Turkey, when they cut the wrong man's head off''
  -- Charles Dickens, _The Pickwick Papers_


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:45 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!jms
From: [e-mail] (Mike Stansberry)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Vswr questions
Date: 30 Oct 1996 14:30:56 GMT
Organization: HP Colorado Springs Division
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <557or0$[e-mail]>
References: <1996Oct29.124223.1@aspen>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mssjms.col.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

[e-mail] wrote:
: I have two questions first What is the formula for taking the Foward vs.
: Reflecdted power readings of swr and turning them into the familiar 1.-:1
: ratio? Second I have a Dentron MT 3000A tuner and am curios. Should it read
150
: watts out when I am transmitting into the dummy load? I am running a Kenwood
 ts
: 820s and at the very least I should get 130 watts out on a bad day but the
: needle only reads 60w out. If I adjust the needle of the Forwrd Power dial
: would this throw off the reflected?

: Any help is appreciated.

                  _______________            _________________
                 /                          /
           _/\  /  Forward Power   +  _/\  /  Reverse Power
              \/                         \/
SWR =    _____________________________________________
                  _______________            _________________
                 /                          /
           _/\  /  Forward Power   -  _/\  /  Reverse Power
              \/                         \/


Mike, K0TER



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:47 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!cs.utexas.edu!news.ti.com!news.dseg.ti.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Brad Bradfield)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: BEST ANT BOOK FOR THE $$$$$
Date: 30 Oct 1996 14:37:22 GMT
Organization: TI Javelin
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <557p72$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cna0157453.dseg.ti.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.7

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...
>
>$10 Amatuer Radio Vertical Antenna Handbook   by Capt Paul
>H. Lee N6PL is the best written book explaining the more
>complex aspects of antennas . He quotes JASIK ,BROWN et al.
> He goes after idiots who say a .5w needs no radials, he
>explains TRAPS are really just tank circuits, he explains
>how to tune a 80m vert for the whole band, He puts down horiz
>HF antennas !! Says verts outperform them . He does a .56w(20M),
>.3w(40M) and .16w(75M) HF antennas .
>  BEST $10 ever spent.
>
>
>______End of text  from altavoz___________


I can heartily second this recommendation.  Captain Paul worked in the field
of communication antennas for years in the Navy and as a civilian.  He
references all the "classical" published antenna articles.  This is an
excellent reference for those working in the field commercially as well as us
amateurs.

73's

Brad Bradfield, WB0CGH

[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:48 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!csn!nntp-xfer-1.csn.net!news-2.csn.net!csn!nntp-xfer-2.csn.net!stortek!tatro
From: [e-mail] (Patrick Tatro)
Subject: Is a Power Divider Necessary for a Phased Array?
Message-ID: <557s5l$[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: Storage Technology Corporation
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 15:27:49 GMT
Lines: 17

  IÆm putting together a 2 element phased array
for 160 meters. IÆve used ELNEC to  model center
loaded elements 30 feet tall and spaced 30 feet
apart with very interesting  results.  IÆm
developing an auto-tuner for each element to allow
maximum band coverage and plan to use lengths of
coax to create the phase shift.

   IÆm afraid that the whole thing wont work
because of power imbalance in the two elements.

  Your comments and suggestions would be greatly
appreciated.

73Æs
Pat N0WCG
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:49 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!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: Altavoz et al.
Date: 30 Oct 1996 11:02:32 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 19
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <557u6o$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (K1BQT)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Im with you, Dick!  I like smoke and lightening, but I hate smoke and
mirrors--and I can't stand babys.

I'd really like to see a serious discussion of charge accelleration.  I
doubt Tom made it up--but if he did, I'd like to see it challenged in a
thoughtful and intellegent way.

I'd like to learn more about how fields form and antennas radiate.  Maybe
it would help me to design better antennas.

I'd like to see hard evidence rather than vague observations and emotional
claims that explain why some antenna designs are credible and others
aren't.

However, I fear I'll never understand any of this because the JOY OF
FLAMING seems to be over-riding the joy of thoughtful discourse.  This is
election time...anybody else willing to vote the the same way??

Rick  K1BQT


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:50 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!news
From: Jake Brodsky <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Contrawound Toroidal Helical Antenna (CTHA)
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 11:11:29 -0500
Organization: Utter Chaos
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: spg-as20s25.erols.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (WinNT; I)

C.D.Sage wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>  I posted to this group a while back regarding the Contrawound Toroidal
> Helical Antenna and promised to keep those interested in it's development
> updated. Attached is a recent news release that you may find of interest.
>  Regards,
<snipped press release>

This subject was covered a few monthes ago.  I'm willing to concede that
this CTHA antenna might have a good isotropic radiation pattern (they
claimed this on their web page), it might even have a good, broadband
impededance match while remaining quite efficient.  That said, I don't
see
how this can be used effectively to work a geosync satellite because it
is omnidirectional.

That is like saying a spot light will work better because it doesn't
have a
reflector behind it.

73,

Jake Brodsky, mailto:[e-mail]
PP-ASEL IA, Cessna Cardinal N30946, Based @ MD24
Amateur Radio Station AB3A
"Beware of the massive impossible!"


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:51 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news.efn.org!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Dick Hughes)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How to Build A Rhombic?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 17:00:25 GMT
Organization: Oregon Public Networking
Lines: 68
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <554ff0$[e-mail]> <555csc$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <556ss1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dynip106.efn.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.299

On 30 Oct 1996 06:33:37 GMT, [e-mail](Anthony Severdia)
wrote:

>In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dick Hughes)
>writes:
>>
>>On 29 Oct 1996 16:54:36 GMT, [e-mail] wrote:
>>
>>>In <554ff0$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom)
>writes:
>>>>In article <[e-mail]>,
>>>>Lundgren William E <[e-mail]> writes:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>    I've heard so much about what a great antenna they are
>(provided yo
>>>>>have the room) and that they perform very well.  My only question
>is does
>>>>>anyone know the formula to build one, has anyone built one, and
>what
>>>>>exactly do you need for support, feeding, etc.  Any infor anyone
>has
>>>>>would be appreciated.
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>The real advantage of a Rhombic is simple construction and
>bandwidth, not
>>>>gain. You can get more gain in much less space with many antennas,
>>>>including the smaller curtains used at VOA.
>>>>
>>>>73 Tom
>>>
>>>Which is EXACTLY why the VOA supplanted them with the curtains.  I
>wish
>>>all our government's decisions were that well made.
>>>
>>>  :)
>>>
>>>//-----------------------------
>>>Mike - W5WQN
>>
>>
>>Yes, but there was something really satisfying about the rhombics used
>>at W6AM when they burned holes through the ether.  I think they had
>>something like 8 wave-lengths per leg.  When he hit the switch back in
>>the AM days, you had to have everything nailed down in your shack.
>>
>>Dick Hughes - W6CCD
>
>    Dick, you remember that period?  <g> I do too and W6AM was a real
>power house in CA.  What was his name? ....Smith or maybe Tibbets?
>
>    FWIW, there is a major shortwave installation outside of
>Okeechobee Florida that uses about 10 rhombics.  Plus others:
>4 curtains and 2 log periodics.  All this is contained in about
>one mile square in grazing and near swampland. Oh, plus 14 100 KW
>transmitters!  Rhombics are NOT passe as some have suggested.  (some
>writers have insisted).  They do have certain advantages.
>
>    -=Tony=-    W6ANV       San Francisco, CA
>

Without looking it up, I think his name was Don Wallace.  It was
interesting getting his QSL cards.  Over time, you would see more and
more antennas on the picture of the "farm."

Dick Hughes - W6CCD



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:52 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!demos!news1.relcom.ru!EU.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!li.net!bad-news.harborcom.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (John Palinkas)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Diamond D-130 for 2m/440?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 17:10:06 GMT
Organization: My House
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pve-pm3-82.harborcom.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.299

I see in the spec sheet for the Diamond D-130 discone scanning antenna
that it can be used to transmit on 2m and 440.  Does anyone have any
experience with this antenna as far as transmitting with it?  I am
trying to get by with one antenna for scanning and ham.  Thanks.

John in N.E. Ohio
KB8YTB


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:53 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!nntp.primenet.com!news.mindspring.com!cpk-news-feed3.bbnplanet.com!news.ipass.net![e-mail]
From: David Cooley <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: ipass.ham-radio,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Larsen KULGLASS antenna
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 11:22:48 -0600
Organization: IPass.net
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: customs119.ipass.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Well,
I went to order a remount kit for my 2m thru the glass larsen antenna...
The truck driver for the moving company had "Borrowed it" when he moved
us... said he was a ham, but sounds more like  CB'er... after filing an
insurance claim, he brought it back... anyway, he brought back the
OUTSIDE half... he still has the cable and inside mount. SO... just
ordered a new one from AES... $60.95 about 5.00 cheaper than HRO.
Later,
Dave

--
========================================================================
David Cooley                AKA N5XMT                 [e-mail]
http://www.ipass.net/~cooldave/
Sponges grow in the ocean... Wonder how deep it would be if they didn't!
========================================================================


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:54 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!venus.sun.com!news2me.EBay.Sun.COM!newsworthy.West.Sun.COM!mandalay!Angerame
From: [e-mail] (Tony)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: TV antenna for 6m.
Date: 30 Oct 1996 17:38:42 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems Inc.
Lines: 17
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <5583r2$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: mandalay.west.sun.com

This really cleared out some cobwebs! In the six meter am haydays in NYC we us
ed
retuned TV antennas as six meter beams. It was only a certtain type that worke
d
well - I think the log periodic type. FINCO made a six/two meter beam that loo
ked
an awfull lot like a fringe tv antenna. Trick is to find one with enough long
elements to make it worthwhile. I can remember vactioning near Atlanta Ga and
loading up my uncle's TV antenna by the use of a small balun transformer with
my
Heath "Sixer" (aka Benton Harbour Lunch Box) and working e-skip to NYC - amazi
ng.
However, the cost of enough aluminum and clamps for a good 4 element six meter
 beam
may not be too high. Also made simple beams out of wire taped to bamboo. A sim
ple
folded dipole ... balun fed with a wire reflector worked wonders.


                                          Tony WA6LZH (ex WA2LBY)






From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:55 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.structured.net!crusty.teleport.com!nntp0.teleport.com!ip-pdx02-23
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Is a Power Divider Necessary for a Phased Array?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 96 18:05:47 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <5585e2$[e-mail]>
References: <557s5l$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx02-23.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <557s5l$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Patrick Tatro) wrote:
>  IÆm putting together a 2 element phased array
>for 160 meters. IÆve used ELNEC to  model center
>loaded elements 30 feet tall and spaced 30 feet
>apart with very interesting  results.  IÆm
>developing an auto-tuner for each element to allow
>maximum band coverage and plan to use lengths of
>coax to create the phase shift.
>
>   IÆm afraid that the whole thing wont work
>because of power imbalance in the two elements.
>
>  Your comments and suggestions would be greatly
>appreciated.
>
>73Æs
>Pat N0WCG
>[e-mail]

Power balance isn't the criterion for making a phased array work. In
general, what you want is the _currents_ to be in the right ratio (both
magnitude and phase-wise). Except for some special cases (such as two
elements in phase or 180 degrees out of phase), elements with equal
currents will have unequal powers. (In a properly designed 4-square
array with very low ground loss, one element actually feeds power _into_
the feed system. It gets this power by coupling to the other elements.)

See The ARRL Antenna Book, Chapter 8, for more explanation.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:01:59 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!athos.itribe.net!global.gc.net!sourcebbs!bob.roach
From: [e-mail] (BOB ROACH)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: RE: Removing an Antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 96 13:14:00 -0500
Distribution: world
Organization: SelectiveSourceBBS VirginiaBeach  [phone]
Reply-To: [e-mail] (BOB ROACH)
References: <01bbc62a$8d165e00$[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: PCBoard Version 15.3
X-Mailer: PCBoard/UUOUT Version 1.30
Lines: 36

JR>-I mounted a 2 meter ant. to my window on a van and I would like to move it
.
  >-The problem is that it is stuck to the window with the adhesive that came
  >-on it. The antenna was made by Radio Shack and the guys there don't have a
  >-clue if it can be removed without damaging the antenna. Anybody got any
  >-ideas? Thanks.
  >-Jon Ralls


Hi Jon,

Several suggestions but first a caution.  Don't get any of these
sustances on the paint job.  They WILL screw it up big time and be sure
to read the instructions FIRST if you have not used these things before.

First you might try a sharp blow from the side.  Some of these glues are
strong in tension but shear more easily.  The blow should be struck
right at the joint.

If that doesn't work and you haven't broken the window yet<GGGGG>  try
soaking the joint with a rag soaked in acetone.  This has an affect on
cyanoacrelate <sp> glues like super glue and crazy glue.  This stuff is
flammable, volatile, and will mess up the paint.

Last resort.  Some plastics disintegrate when exposed to freon.(found in
some contact cleaners, not the stuff in the air conditioner)  This will
destroy the antenna  and may harm the paint but won't hurt the glass.


PLEASE read the labels before you start and think about kids and others
who might be exposed accidentally without knowing it.

Good luck and 73
Bob
KE4QOK

 * SLMR 2.1a * Very funny Scotty........now beam up my clothes!


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:00 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!rhelton
From: [e-mail] (Richard Helton)
Subject: Re: 73's CCD Antenna
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <55658m$[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 18:47:43 GMT
Lines: 12
Sender: [e-mail]

Fractenna ([e-mail]) wrote:
: There are about 15 references on it, including patents.

: I will provide the most accessible one:

: ' The Controlled Current Distribution Antenna' by S. Kaplan and J. Bauer,
: ARRL Antenna Compendium 2, p132 ,1989.

  Thank you!  I will pick up a copy of the reference.

--
                                             [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:01 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.icix.net!news-w.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!esgadm.esg.mk.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Tim Shearer)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Found hardline.  Is it 50 or 72 ohm?
Date: 30 Oct 1996 18:50:17 GMT
Organization: Morrison Knudsen Corporation
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <558819$[e-mail]>
References: <01bbc26d$476d7480$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 144.78.40.95
X-Newsreader: WinVN version 0.82

In article <[e-mail]>, Maude Schyffert <maude.schyffer
[e-mail]> says:
>
>Ron Ammundsen wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Three coils of 7/8" rigid hardline coax washed up on our island.  The
>> shortest section is about 60', the longest is maybe 180'.  The water damage
>> seems to extend in only about 12" on each end.
>>
>> Is there an easy way to tell whether this is 50 ohm or 72 ohm hardline?
>>
>Well impedance is depending on the ratio between inner conductor
>diameter and the diameter of the shield, I do not remember the formula
>but you can always check with an known cabel.
>
>SM0BKZ

Zo=138 / sqrt (Er)  x  log10 ( D/d )

Er is dielectric constant. for polyethylene its about 2.3
D is inner diameter of outer sheath
d is outer diameter of center conductor

get a micrometer and measure these and plug in to equation.

example 3/4" hardline: D=.682"  d=.185"  assume Er=2.3
Zo=138 / sqrt (2.3)  x log10 (.682/.185) = 51.5 ohms

note you will have problems with the Er dielectric constant.
foamed dielectrics are not Er=2.3 but ??? with more air entrained ???
have a Er lower than 2.3 which causes the impedance to be higher and
closer to the air dielectric (Er=1) impedance of 78 ohms in the above
example.

Try these measurements and calculations on any piece of coax. It
hopefully will reveal to you how coax is made (you can make coax sections
of any impedance yourself like for those 1/4 wave stubs you can buy to change
that 75 ohm
CATV hardline into 50 ohm at some freq)

This is a good opportunity to learn some theory.

Tim


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:02 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!enews.sgi.com!news.sgi.com!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!fc.hp.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Marc Illsley Clarke)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: 30 Oct 1996 19:01:04 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Fort Collins Site
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <55861u$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpfimic.fc.hp.com
In-reply-to: [e-mail]'s message of 30 Oct 1996 18:16:30 GMT

>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Bruhns <[e-mail]> writes:
In article <55861u$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns) writes
:


    Tom> Cecil Moore ([e-mail]) wrote: : Does
    Tom> anybody else suspect a practical joker in our midst? : Maybe
    Tom> even one of the regulars willing to open a new account : for
    Tom> a free trial period?

    Tom> Yes, that occured to me.  Practical joker or just plain
    Tom> a**h***. I have a short list of possiblities.  Don't make no
    Tom> nevermind nohow, it won't be long till nobody pays attention
    Tom> to the soprano. Just hope it doesn't drive away those who
    Tom> actually contribute to understanding on the group.

    Tom> -- Cheers, Tom [e-mail]


altavoz or whatever his login was made it into my author's kill file
several days ago.  Lots of noise, lots of sparks, no discernable
signal.

--
Marc Illsley Clarke, [e-mail], KB0YDL, KB0YDL@N0MPI.#NECO.CO.USA.NOAM
4857 North Sheridan Avenue, Loveland, Colorado 80538-1767 USA
(Representing solely myself, I am emphatically NOT a representative of
any employer, club, group, church, league, organization, or government!)





From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:06 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.orst.edu!osshe.edu!internet!oconneld
From: Dan O'Connell <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Re;  Rhombic antenna
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 11:41:35 -0800
Organization: Oregon State System of Higher Education
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.95.961030113822.18574D-100000@internet>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: internet.oit.osshe.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Sender: oconneld@internet
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>



> > > The ARRL Antenna Handbook will give you construction details, but the ga
in
> > > will be much less than predicted. The real advantage of a Rhombic is
> > > simple construction and bandwidth, not gain. You can get more gain in mu
ch
> > > less space with many antennas, including the smaller curtains used at VO
A.
> >
> >      Thanks for the information Tom. You're the only one who answered this
> > question in a civil manor.
> >
> ..  Rhombic antennas were fair value when land and poles were relatively
> inexpensive.  As a practical matter, about 1.5:1 band width before the
> pattern goes strange and poor side lobes are the general case.
>       Purely as an intelectual task, I once tried to optimize
> Rhombic design.  With the computational aids then available, it
> was a fool's task as there are too many varables.
>       You can get a very good picture (yes: picture) of what a Rhombic does
> by using the antenna part of VOA's propagation program.  No need to use
> the excelent EZNEC ( or the like).
 this gentleman is correct in that they were once a good bang for the
buck, however today , with a much smaller area, you will get much more
gain and pattern if you just stack a couple antennas in the direction you
wish. You could even make them "rope yagis" if you have the supports.  I
also spent an enourmos amount of time computer modeling rhombics. It just
isnt worth the size, or matching problems. Dan WA7TDZ



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:07 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!news1.good.net!news.good.net!news.datatamers.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.ham-radio,rec.ham-radio.swap,rec.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.swap,rec.radio.swap
Subject: RE: Ham Gear for Sale....
Date: 30 Oct 1996 19:49:38 GMT
Organization: condate
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <01bbc693.6d3802a0$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <5434en$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <54ih35$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: user102.dt1.datatamers.com
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30753 rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors:307 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41431 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117237 rec.radio.swap:93049

> In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Michael White) writes:
> |> > Reason for selling is that I just got married a few months ago and
> |> > either the Ham Gear or me go.
> |> "Yeah, my wife said she'd leave me if I didn't get off the radio.
Over."
>

It doesn't have to be an either/or thing. . .
Put the ham gear in storage until you decide to leave.

Henry  KK6JR, G4NOC
Been there, done that, really.



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:10 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!newspump.sol.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.stealth.net!newsfeed.uk.ibm.net!news-m01.ny.us.ibm.net!news-s01.ca.us.ibm.net!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail]@smtp-news2.ibm.net
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.homebrew,rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: 30 Oct 1996 19:52:37 GMT
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <558bm5$29fs$[e-mail]>
References: <54nc7a$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <557aht$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]@smtp-gw01.ny.us.ibm.net
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip129-37-205-150.in.us.ibm.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 2.0
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30748 rec.radio.amateur.equipment:41422 rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:20606 rec.radio.amateur.misc:117220

In <557aht$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]-stutt
gart.de () writes:
>In article <[e-mail]>,
>Dick Hughes <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>In general, the correct length of coax for an HF antenna is the
>>distance it takes to get from the transmitter to the antenna.  Don't
>>worry about length.
>
>Please do not disregard situations where the line can be used for
>matching. Take a quad loop, with 100 Ohms input impedance.
>A quaterwave of 75 Ohms line, with a few coiled turns for a balun
>will save you an antenna tuner. And there a other situations
>where matching is simplified (less losses) when using a defined
>length of line for tranformation.
>
>73, Moritz DL5UH
>
>


    Excellent example here. I fed a triband quad with this method for several
years.
It was the only way I could get a GEM Quad to play with a single 50 ohm coax t
o
three tuned 75 ohm quarter wave stubs.
                                                                         Jim W
D9AHF

OS/2 Warp V4  Java Enabled Operating System.


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:11 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newspump.sol.net!news.mindspring.com!cpk-news-feed3.bbnplanet.com!news.ipass.net![e-mail]
From: Dave Hockaday <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: ipass.ham-radio,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Larsen KULGLASS antenna
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 12:52:17 -0800
Organization: IPass.net
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: customs15.ipass.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; I)

David Cooley wrote:
>
> Well,
> I went to order a remount kit for my 2m thru the glass larsen antenna...
> The truck driver for the moving company had "Borrowed it" when he moved
> us... said he was a ham, but sounds more like  CB'er... after filing an
> insurance claim, he brought it back... anyway, he brought back the
> OUTSIDE half... he still has the cable and inside mount. SO... just
> ordered a new one from AES... $60.95 about 5.00 cheaper than HRO.
> Later,
> Dave

Whew! Boy, they don't give those things away...

--
Dave Hockaday WB4IUY
[e-mail]

http://www.ipass.net/~hockaday/
http://www.ipass.net/~wb4iuy/
http://www.ipass.net/~teara/
http://www.geocities.com/TheTropics/3349/
http://www.RTPnet.org/~fcarc/
http://www.RTPnet.org/~rdrc/


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:12 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!EU.net!enews.sgi.com!news.sgi.com!olivea!bznews.apple.com!nntp1.apple.com!news
From: Kok Chen <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Contrawound Toroidal Helical Antenna (CTHA)
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 14:56:32 -0700
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <555k43$[e-mail]> <5562ge$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: chenko2.apple.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Macintosh; I; 68K)

Fractenna write:

>Tom, you really need to get a life.
>
>Go explore your 'magic' elsewhere.
>
>The newsgroup is sick of you harping on this and I have been very
>forthcoming in answering questions via e-mail. So take the
>admonitions of OTHERS--they're sick of your prattle. ANd
>there's hours of answers already.


I don't know where you got the idea that Tom is the unwelcomed
one here.

Some of us have been sitting on the sidelines quietly cheering
Tom on.  At least I glean some antenna physics reading what Tom
writes.

Fractional dimension topology?  it has its place.  But I, like
Tom, have yet to have demonstrated to me any mathematical _evidence_
that they are more efficient at launching Poynting vectors than
Kurt's aluminium ladder.  I am easily convinced, believe me.  But,
with facts please...

73

Kok Chen, AA6TY


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:13 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!dsm6.dsmnet.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Dean T. Miller)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Removing an Antenna
Date: 30 Oct 1996 22:08:40 GMT
Organization: Miller and Associates
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbc62a$8d165e00$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: slppp23.dsmnet.com
X-Newsreader: OUI TE 1.5

Hi Jon,

In article <01bbc62a$8d165e00$[e-mail]>, From
"Jon Ralls" <[e-mail]>, the following was written:
> I mounted a 2 meter ant. to my window on a van and I would like to
> move it.
> The problem is that it is stuck to the window with the adhesive that
> came on it. The antenna was made by Radio Shack and the guys there
> don't have a
> clue if it can be removed without damaging the antenna. Anybody got
> any ideas? Thanks.

Go to a local auto-glass replacement shop.  Taking the mounting off the
glass requires a blowtorch and careful chiseling to prevent stressing
the glass.  If the shop happens to break the glass, they just might
replace it for free.<g>



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:15 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!the-symposium.demon.co.uk!Mandy
From: Mandy Wright <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 23:25:34 +0000
Organization: Radio Services
Lines: 99
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
 <555jar$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 3.00 <oJPoSssIZV2StO2Ral+KdVy6du>

In article <[e-mail]>, altavoz
<[e-mail]> writes
>W8JI Tom wrote:
>>
>> In article <[e-mail]>, altavoz
>> <[e-mail]> writes:
>>
>> >altavoz: I know what im talking about , so i made the absolute
>> >statement , and i stand by it . Between .25w and .5w you'll need
>> >a cap to tune and caps are expensive , so why not not just jump
>> >to .6w and a coil does it and the 2nd lobe isnt significant.
>> >  What you're not looking at is the pattern (gain). .25w
>> >pattern is trash.
>>
>> Actually the minor lobe of a 5/8 wl is not insignificant, that's why most
>> broadcast stations abandoned them by the 30's. On sky wave, the minor lobe
>> arrives back on earth and interferes with the desired signal from the main
>> lobe, and gives rise to severe fading.
>>
>> A 5/8 wl antenna ONLY acheives its' gain when over a very very large
>> groundplane, several wavelengths of near perfect ground. Without the large
>> perfectly reflecting ground, the 5/8 wl has about the same or slightly
>> LESS gain than a 1/2 wl with no reflecting ground.
>>
>> Any slight matching advantage in matching is offset by these
>> disadvantages.
>>
>> 73 Tom
>
>altavoz: Read Paul H. Lee page 84 "Am' Rad' Vert' Ant' HB"
>As he proves you must have a counterpoise for a 1/2w ant.
>A J POLE DOESNT WORK ! IT HAS POOR LOW ANGLE RADIATION .
>He says " Actualy the 5/8w vert is better than the 1/2
>vert from the standpoints of low angle radiation and feedpoint
>impedance.."

Hi Altavoz, I like your style.  Do you want a big wooden spoon for
Christmas?! (Hope this translates OK) A little controversy and a lively
exchange of views usually leads to enlightenment all round.

I once heard it said by the Chief Rabbi in the UK "If you win an
argument you've gained nothing, only if you lose an argument can you
learn something" ;)

During 1990/91 myself and a colleague were carrying out tests for  "The
Antenna Standards Working Group" in the UK, to devise a method for
accurate comparison tests for antennas used for Land Mobile Radio in the
VHF and UHF bands. We required a predictable ground plane for use with
over a broad band.  After reading the experiments carried out by Myers
and Sumner (see Kraus Antennas) with both a square and a circular ground
plane, they reasoned partial cancellation will occur as the diagonal is
square root 2.  These results were still unpredictable.

Our reasoning, where the diagonal is twice the shorter side and at least
1/4 a wavelength to the nearest edge( ie 1/2 wavelength to the furthes
edge), cancellation should occur.  Use was made of a rectangle with the
ratio 1:root3.  This gave smoother results but still showed some
variations in the response.  The final test bed consisted of an elipse
ratio 2:1, the intention being to avoid any resonances.  The effect of
this would be the same as the root 3 rectangle but without any sudden
changes in direction, and would give a flatter response.  This test-bed
is now in use by several British companies.

Dimensions of 1.25 x 2.5 metres with a 1/4 wave antenna mounted at the
centre, were tested at 30 mc/s to 1 g/s.  Impedance measurements carried
out and when compared to calculated figures gave errors of less than 10%
at 30mc/s , 5% at 50mc/s, 2% above 80mc/s. From 300 mc/s upwards there
were no significant errors, tests showed a 1/4 wave radiator has a
radiation resistance of approx 37 ohms and the reactance is zero at
84/85 degrees in length.

Note: if a ground plane is 1/4 wavelength in radius it becomes a
counterpoise, and is part of a resonant system in the same way as a 1/4
wave with radials.  See Jasik - Antenna Engineering Handbook Chapter 22-
4.  If the ground plane, as in our case, is non-resonant it is intended
to work in the same way as an infinite ground plane, and provide an
image of the radiating element.

To obtain a perfect match to a 50 ohm source a capacitor may be added in
series, at the feed point, to cancel the inductive component when the
length has been extended to approx. 130 degees, to increase the
radiation resistance.

Has anybody got spare copies of the following that they would like to
lend to Altavoz, I need mine for my business!

Reference Data for Radio Engineers ITT
Antenna Engineering Handbook    Jasik
Antenna Engineering Handbook 2  Johnson and Jasik
Antennas                        Kraus
Antenna Theory and Design Volumes 1 and 2 H Paul Williams ( my mentor!)
Radio Engineering BBC Manual    E K Sandeman
HF Antennas                     Leslie Moxon         (my other mentor!)
VHF Radio                       Keller
Mandy
(Replying on behalf of my husband who hates computers
despite being a practising RF Engineer!)
Sussex
UK      *Please note the NEW ADDRESS!*


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:16 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!the-symposium.demon.co.uk!Mandy
From: Mandy Wright <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Thru-the-glass ant?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 23:30:47 +0000
Organization: Radio Services
Lines: 28
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <5555k5$[e-mail]>
 <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 3.00 <oJPoSssIZV2StO2Ral+KdVy6du>

In article <[e-mail]>, Alex Evonosky
<[e-mail]> writes
>"Robert J. Schmidt" <"[e-mail]"@polaristel.net> wrote:
>
>>I am looking to put a thru-the-glass antenna on my truck for 2M or
>>2M/440.  Which manufacturer should I go for?  Any experiences??
>>
>>TNX es 73
>>Bob, WA9JDR
>>[e-mail]
>
>Hello.
>I use the Larsen KL series for 2m thru glass.  Works well and has a
>3dB gain.  Length of rod is 48"....
>73- Alex/kb4lbx
A range of thru-glass antennas are available from Revco Ltd in the UK
Telephone [phone]

These are available for export or credit card purchase if you are
outside the UK.

Do not mount these through windows with heating elements in the glass.

Hope this helps.
Mandy
(Replying on behalf of my husband, Tim (G1BCR / G9BZW), who hates computers
despite (or maybe because of) being a practising RF Engineer.)
Sussex  UK    Please note the NEW ADDRESS!


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:17 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!the-symposium.demon.co.uk!Mandy
From: Mandy Wright <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Goniometer feed for bal line ?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 23:38:10 +0000
Organization: Radio Services
Lines: 29
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <1996Oct29.130802@axp1>
NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 3.00 <oJPoSssIZV2StO2Ral+KdVy6du>

In article <1996Oct29.130802@axp1>, [e-mail] writes
>I am building a no-compromise 105 foot dipole fed with true open
>wire line ( 2" spaced ceramic insulators every 18", with #8 wire, up
>about 80 feet).
>
>Many people seem to feed balanced line with an internal or external 4:1
>balun (usually ferrite or powdered iron toroidial core).  I read that
>this is less than optimum due to operating the balun outside of its
>useful impedance range.
>
>The classic arrangement of a resonant transformer type tuner with either
>goniometer

I presume you are refering to a Variometer, ie a tunable inductor.
A goniometer is an untuned rotating transformer used for angle
measurement in a radio direction finder, fitted between the receiver
input and a pair of loop antenna or an Adcock array.

This might help

>or series capacitor coupling control appears to be the best
>arrangement, but seems to be a lot more trouble;  As a practical matter,
>does the balun feed work well?
>

Mandy
(Replying on behalf of my husband, Tim (G1BCR / G9BZW), who hates computers
despite (or maybe because of) being a practising RF Engineer.)
Sussex  UK


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:18 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!the-symposium.demon.co.uk!Mandy
From: Mandy Wright <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Wok as reflector?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 23:39:55 +0000
Organization: Radio Services
Lines: 20
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 3.00 <oJPoSssIZV2StO2Ral+KdVy6du>

In article <[e-mail]>, Jens Goerke
<[e-mail]> writes
>Hi, all!
>
>No, this is not a joke. I was just watching a japanese movie
>(Tampopo) and the thought of using a wok as a reflector for
>UHF or as a parabolic antenna for 10GHz came to me.
>Has anybody ever tried it?
>
>73, Jens, DB9LL

Yes! See UHF Radio Manual (RSGB) Jessop.

He also tried a dustbin/garbage can lid on 10 gc/s.

Best wishes
Mandy
(Replying on behalf of my husband, Tim (G1BCR / G9BZW), who hates computers
despite (or maybe because of) being a practising RF Engineer.)
Sussex  UK


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:19 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!the-symposium.demon.co.uk!Mandy
From: Mandy Wright <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HELIX I THINK
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 23:44:08 +0000
Organization: Radio Services
Lines: 17
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbc5d3$caae1c00$375292cf@default>
NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 3.00 <oJPoSssIZV2StO2Ral+KdVy6du>

In article <01bbc5d3$caae1c00$375292cf@default>, DAVE ABSHIRE
<[e-mail]> writes
>I just call AES in Tampa asking about helix cable and wanted connectors and
>they didn't have any or couldn't tell me anything about it.
>Does anyone have any info on this cable? It looks like conduit with ribs
>about 1/2 to 3/4 inch in diameter. I have about 150 foot and need a elbow
>or swivel at the bottom of the tower. Its 50 ohm cable.
>                               Thank you
>                               Dave
>
Use  rotating (n) couplers (for Radar Antenna) available from: Suhner or
Radal or Sage.  Try Penstock if in the USA, or Mainline Electronics in
the UK.
Mandy
(Replying on behalf of my husband, Tim (G1BCR / G9BZW), who hates computers
despite (or maybe because of) being a practising RF Engineer.)
Sussex  UK


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:20 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!news1.best.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!dimensional.com!news.wizard.com !news.ici.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-4.sprintlink.net!itnews.sc.intel.com!news
From: Cecil Moore <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 15:48:51 -0800
Organization: Intel Corporation
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <555jar$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.102.182
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I)

Tom> Actually the minor lobe of a 5/8 wl is not insignificant, that's why most
Tom> broadcast stations abandoned them by the 30's. On sky wave, the minor lob
e
Tom> arrives back on earth and interferes with the desired signal from the mai
n
Tom> lobe, and gives rise to severe fading.

> altavoz: FALSE .

Hey Guys, I just modeled a 5/8 vertical on 40m over MNec ground.
EZNEC sez a minor lobe at 60 deg TOA about 5 dB (one 'S' unit?)
down from the major lobe at 16 deg TOA. Anybody using a 5/8 WL
vertical on HF?

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


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:21 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.magicnet.net!news1.good.net!news.good.net!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] (JAMES MCEWEN)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Cecil's lobes
Date: 30 Oct 96 23:51:02 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

     altavoz wrote:
     > altavoz: You are too theorectical, not practical, you need
     > experience . You need to learn patterns and main lobes.

      Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC,  it is obvious that you haven't put you very
     few years to good use, when someone as experienced as the
      Wiz of altaOZ attacks your lobes.(maybe he is Ferangi?)  Even if
      you are too theorectical (sic) we will still value your
     contributions to the newsgroup.<G>

     I'd like to start a fund to buy the Wiz a spell checker.  He
     never did post his name & call sign did he?

     Jim KA6TPR



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:22 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!panix!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Contrawound Toroidal Helical Antenna (CTHA)
Date: 30 Oct 1996 18:55:33 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 5
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <558ptl$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I have no doubt that they had two-way communications between a hand-held
(sort of) CTHA and a geosynchronous satellite. The question is: what is
the niche for this device?

73 Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:23 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!the-symposium.demon.co.uk!Mandy
From: Mandy Wright <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How do you measure radiation resistance?
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 00:14:25 +0000
Organization: Radio Services
Lines: 63
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <555c3p$[e-mail]>
 <5562hr$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 3.00 <oJPoSssIZV2StO2Ral+KdVy6du>

In article <[e-mail]>, altavoz
<[e-mail]> writes
>Fractenna wrote:
>>
>> Tom, he just wants to know if you can measure it--if you don't want to
>> answer his question then just STAY OFF!
>>
>> Chip
>
>
>altavoz: Ha ha ha ha ha ....his name is Edward , not TOM
>ha ha ha hahahh ha

Actually Altavoz, Chip's correct - he was posting a reply to Tom! HA HA!

But anyway:

Yes you can measure indirectly the radiation resistance.  We devised
this method for use (See reply to WHY Antennas of 5/8 wavelength?) to
determine the following:
1) Resonant frequency of antenna
2) The VSWR or input impedance at that frequency
3) The usable bandwidth between VSWR limits
4) THE RADIATION EFFICIENCY
From 2 and 4 we can determine both the radiation resistance and the loss
resistance.

Equipment
Use of dual directional coupler ie HP778D, detector heads HP420A, VSWR
indicator Marconi 6658 (could use HP415E).
Signal generator
Slotted line

Method
Find and record resonant frequency and VSWR.
Measure input impedance with slotted line.
Refit directional coupler
Tune generator to resonant frequency
Replace antenna with short circuited termination
Calibrate for 0db forward and reflected
Reconnect antenna
Record forward and reflected power indications (Forward should be 0db
and reflected should be minimal)
Fit radiation shield and record fwd and reflected indications (fwd
should be 0db and ref a little below 0db)

We now have direct readings of resonant frequency, VSWR, and input
impedance (this includes radiation resistance and loss resistance).
With the shield in place we obtain the loss resistance and can now
calculate from the ratios radiation resistance.

For further info on radiation shield see H Wheeler The radian sphere
around a small antenna or Chapter 6 of Antenna Engineering Handbook 2nd
Edition Jasik.

I know this is only a summary, email me for more info.

Hope this helps

Mandy
(Replying on behalf of my husband, Tim (G1BCR / G9BZW), who hates computers
despite (or maybe because of) being a practising RF Engineer.)
Sussex  UK


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:24 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!the-symposium.demon.co.uk!Mandy
From: Mandy Wright <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax Question
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 00:26:53 +0000
Organization: Radio Services
Lines: 23
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <yfXB2pANJ$[e-mail]>
References: <555ivs$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 3.00 <oJPoSssIZV2StO2Ral+KdVy6du>

In article <555ivs$[e-mail]>, William Cann
<[e-mail]> writes
>I have a roll of coax stamped "CG 92 H/U".  I cant seem to find
>anything about it on material I have on hand.  Does anyone know
>the specs on it?
>ie: impedence, loss/100ft and freq limits?
>
>Thanks
>
You're welcome!
Probably mil.spec. no. UR92
Z=50ohm  OD=0.54"  core=7/0.029"  die= polythene  cap= 30pf/ft
vel.f= 0.666
att(dB/100ft)=11 100mc/s  15.6db 200mc/s  19.2 at 300mc/s  27.5 600mc/s
Not suitable above 1gc/s
Data obtained from UK Home Office, Radio Regulatory Dept Listing of
Cable Losses.

Hope this helps
Mandy
(Replying on behalf of my husband, Tim (G1BCR / G9BZW), who hates computers
despite (or maybe because of) being a practising RF Engineer.)
Sussex  UK


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:25 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ptd.net!newsmaster
From: Stephen Dobak <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: (none)
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 19:36:59 -0500
Organization: ProLog - PenTeleData, Inc.
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs1-08.sun.ptd.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (X11; I; Linux 2.0.0 i586)

add [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:26 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.ptd.net!newsmaster
From: Stephen Dobak <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: (no subject)
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 19:38:01 -0500
Organization: ProLog - PenTeleData, Inc.
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs1-08.sun.ptd.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (X11; I; Linux 2.0.0 i586)

subscribe


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:27 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.mxol.com!news3.agis.net!agis!cancer.vividnet.com!hunter.premier.net!hammer.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!qualcomm.com!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: 31 Oct 96 01:46:41 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

My thoughts here are that everything in antennas is a compromise.  A 1/4 wave
vertical can be hooked directly to 50 ohm coax, with radials bent down 45
degrees, without a matching device.  A 5/8 wave will give you more gain than
a 1/4 wave (due to the *squashed* radiation pattern), but requires a matching
device.  A 1/2 wave vertical needs a more complex matching device, but does
not require radials, which makes it a good choice for HT operations.


Bob
KD8WU


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:28 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 73's CCD Antenna
Date: 30 Oct 1996 21:15:05 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 1
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <559239$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

My pleasure.


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:29 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!misery.millcomm.com!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jules Freundlich)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: SOMMER XP-507 ANTENNA
Date: 31 Oct 1996 02:21:51 GMT
Organization: Your Organization
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <5592fv$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dial-01.mpls.millcomm.com
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.6+

I have for sale a SOMMER XP-507 YAGI. This is an 8 element antenna
covering 7 bands (10-40 meters). It has a tiltable Mastholder enabling
servicing in place on the tower. Original cost over $1000. Disassembly
and pickup om site in Minneapolis. $300.00 Call 612 377 7269 or e-mail
to [e-mail].


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:30 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!info.uah.edu!maze.dpo.uab.edu!tty16.maze.ppp.uab.edu!user
From: [e-mail] (David Morrisse)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Question about the MFJ-1020B indoor active ant. vs. wire
Date: 31 Oct 1996 02:24:46 GMT
Organization: Univ. of Alabama at Birmingham
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tty16.maze.ppp.uab.edu

I seem to get at least equal if not consistenty better SW reception
(stronger signal, less noise) with the simple roll-up long wire antenna
that was supplied with my GRUNDIG YB400 than I do when I use the MFJ-1020B
indoor active antenna.  Why is this?  At $100 dollars for the MFJ with AC
power supply, I expected better reception than I am getting.  Anyone know
why or have similar experience?  Comments appreciated...

David


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:31 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!altitude!usenet
From: Madjid <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 21:45:32 -0500
Organization: ORION Microsystems
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <550jh5$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <5550of$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dynppp-241.hip.cam.org
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:
>
> altavoz wrote:
> > altavoz: It's there , you are too inexperienced to spot it.
>
> Does anybody else suspect a practical joker in our midst?
> Maybe even one of the regulars willing to open a new account
> for a free trial period?
>
> 73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


Noooo, we are too inexperienced to spot it :)

Madjid VE2GMI  @ [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:33 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!netnews.mis.net!news
From: "Joseph G. Hill" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Wok as reflector?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 22:02:28 -0500
Organization: mis.net
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: loukyts129.mis.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I)

Mandy Wright wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, Jens Goerke
> <[e-mail]> writes
> >Hi, all!
> >
> >No, this is not a joke. I was just watching a japanese movie
> >(Tampopo) and the thought of using a wok as a reflector for
> >UHF or as a parabolic antenna for 10GHz came to me.
> >Has anybody ever tried it?
> >
> >73, Jens, DB9LL
>
> Yes! See UHF Radio Manual (RSGB) Jessop.
>
> He also tried a dustbin/garbage can lid on 10 gc/s.
>
> Best wishes
> Mandy
> (Replying on behalf of my husband, Tim (G1BCR / G9BZW), who hates computers
> despite (or maybe because of) being a practising RF Engineer.)
> Sussex  UK

You might not believe this but I know a ham in North Dakota that has
worked nearly 200 countries on a wok amnd it was a real cheap wok at
that...from K-mart I think!


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:34 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!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] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: 30 Oct 1996 22:06:00 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 1
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <55952o$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Moxon Rules!


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:36 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!altitude!usenet
From: Madjid <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: AM indoor antenna
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 22:14:56 -0500
Organization: ORION Microsystems
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dynppp-241.hip.cam.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)

Adam Martin wrote:
>
> I have a question about AM reception.  I am trying to recieve a station
> (1030 AM) at a range of about 300 miles.  On a night with good atmospheric
> conditions, I get OK reception with some inteference, however sometimes I
> get nothing.  I am only using the little loop antenna that came with my
> stereo receiver.
>
> Does anyone have any suggestions about making an antenna (as simple as
> possible)? Or maybe a commercial product thats available (inexpensive)?
> I'm limited to an indoor antenna.  Also, any suggestions for an
> improvement over the cheap FM bipole wire antenna that comes with stereo
> receivers?  Obviously I'm not talking about the same range as the AM
> antenna, but a 50-60 mile radius would be good.

I know that my Newsreader is crazy (I read answers before the
questions are asked) but I read the same question last week or
the week before ???

Anyway, there is a lot of info about all sorts of antennas in the
following page, even a "directional" AM closet-door loop antenna
(by turning the door!)  :)

http://www.sds.se/org/swl/antenn/antenn.html

Madjid VE2GMI


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:36 1996
From: [e-mail] (steve perron)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: First antenna, what to expect?
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 03:29:59 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99e/32.227
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.47.174.16
Lines: 8
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-atl-21.sprintlink.net!endeavor.newcomm.net!206.47.174.16

        Now that I just got my license, I have been thinkering with
what kind of antenna to put.  My problem, is lack of space.  My
backyard is only 30 feet by 40 feet deep, and I live in what could be
described as a row house.  I will probably string a dipole for 20
meters, but I was wondering what kind of problems should I expect from
aluminum siding and rfi.

Steve Perron VO1SLP


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:38 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!qualcomm.com!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (A N Thompson)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: 31 Oct 96 04:08:32 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

[My instincts tell me that I shouldn't get involved in this
discussion, but I can't resist]

I agree with Chip, Tom, et al, regarding the theoretical
advantage of the 5/8-wavelength antenna vs. the results
obtainable in practice over a less than ideal ground
plane; i.e., it's not as effective in the real world as it is on
paper.  When over lossy ground, the very low angle
radiation from the 5/8-wavelength antenna is absorbed
in the ground rather than being reflected.  Under those
circumstances the high-angle lobe becomes a major
portion of the far field radiation from the antenna.

The taller (1/2- and 5/8-wave) verticals require more
extensive grounds than does the 1/4-wave vertical.  The
1/4-wave antenna will outperform a 1/2-wave antenna unless
an (excellent) ground plane extends out to about 1.5 wave-
lengths.  The 5/8-wave antenna requires and even more
extensive ground.

73,

Arliss


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:38 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-4.sprintlink.net!news.indy.net!news-out.internetmci.com!pull-feed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.logical.net!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Fwd: Tower Safety
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 05:08:25 GMT
Organization:
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup044.qnsbny1.capital.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.1/32.230

[e-mail] (FORREST GEHRKE) wrote:


>its more famous pictures.  One of them was of a 1500 ft.
>tower on its way down with three fellows clinging to
>the side of it at about 1000 ft.  The camera caught the
>scene when the tower was at 45 degrees.

>With no recourse for those workers when an accident occurs
>at such heights, shouldn't they be carrying those parachute
>backpacks you see stunt artists use for directed landings?

When I first heard about the recent fall of that tower in Texas, I
wondered why they don't wear chutes too. Modern parachutes are not
nearly as large and cumbersome to wear as they were years ago, and
1000 to 1500 ft. is plenty high enough to deploy the chute. Does
anyone know why they are not used on these tall towers?
73,
Butch N2YMJ


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:39 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.structured.net!crusty.teleport.com!nntp0.teleport.com!produnl2
From: [e-mail] (DAVID P. LOEWEN)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: FS: ARRL Handbook
Date: 31 Oct 1996 05:08:31 GMT
Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access [phone]
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <559c8f$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: linda.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]


For Sale:

1994 ARRL Handbook in new condition,
Hardback edition, Pd $25, sell for $20 (shipped)
e-mail if interested


David P. Loewen
Salem, Or  USA
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:42 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 21:12:59 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 90
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
         <555jar$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.147.208.89
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Mandy Wright wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, altavoz
> <[e-mail]> writes
> >W8JI Tom wrote:
> >>
> >> In article <[e-mail]>, altavoz
> >> <[e-mail]> writes:
> >>
> >> >altavoz: I know what im talking about , so i made the absolute
> >> >statement , and i stand by it . Between .25w and .5w you'll need
> >> >a cap to tune and caps are expensive , so why not not just jump
> >> >to .6w and a coil does it and the 2nd lobe isnt significant.
> >> >  What you're not looking at is the pattern (gain). .25w
> >> >pattern is trash.
> >>
> >> Actually the minor lobe of a 5/8 wl is not insignificant, that's why most
> >> broadcast stations abandoned them by the 30's. On sky wave, the minor lob
e
> >> arrives back on earth and interferes with the desired signal from the mai
n
> >> lobe, and gives rise to severe fading.
> >>
> >> A 5/8 wl antenna ONLY acheives its' gain when over a very very large
> >> groundplane, several wavelengths of near perfect ground. Without the larg
e
> >> perfectly reflecting ground, the 5/8 wl has about the same or slightly
> >> LESS gain than a 1/2 wl with no reflecting ground.
> >>
> >> Any slight matching advantage in matching is offset by these
> >> disadvantages.
> >>
> >> 73 Tom
> >
> >altavoz: Read Paul H. Lee page 84 "Am' Rad' Vert' Ant' HB"
> >As he proves you must have a counterpoise for a 1/2w ant.
> >A J POLE DOESNT WORK ! IT HAS POOR LOW ANGLE RADIATION .
> >He says " Actualy the 5/8w vert is better than the 1/2
> >vert from the standpoints of low angle radiation and feedpoint
> >impedance.."
>
> During 1990/91 myself and a colleague were carrying out tests for  "The
> Antenna Standards Working Group" in the UK, to devise a method for
> accurate comparison tests for antennas used for Land Mobile Radio in the
> VHF and UHF bands. We required a predictable ground plane for use with
> over a broad band.  After reading the experiments carried out by Myers
> and Sumner (see Kraus Antennas) with both a square and a circular ground
> plane, they reasoned partial cancellation will occur as the diagonal is
> square root 2.  These results were still unpredictable.

>
> Our reasoning, where the diagonal is twice the shorter side and at least
> 1/4 a wavelength to the nearest edge( ie 1/2 wavelength to the furthes
> edge), cancellation should occur.  Use was made of a rectangle with the
> ratio 1:root3.  This gave smoother results but still showed some
> variations in the response.  The final test bed consisted of an elipse
> ratio 2:1, the intention being to avoid any resonances.  The effect of
> this would be the same as the root 3 rectangle but without any sudden
> changes in direction, and would give a flatter response.  This test-bed
> is now in use by several British companies.

altavoz: Does anyone back you up on this ?
And 2ndly and more important is how does this effect what i
asid about a .5wl ant needing a .5wl radial system ?
>
> Dimensions of 1.25 x 2.5 metres with a 1/4 wave antenna mounted at the
> centre, were tested at 30 mc/s to 1 g/s.  Impedance measurements carried
> out and when compared to calculated figures gave errors of less than 10%
> at 30mc/s , 5% at 50mc/s, 2% above 80mc/s. From 300 mc/s upwards there
> were no significant errors, tests showed a 1/4 wave radiator has a
> radiation resistance of approx 37 ohms and the reactance is zero at
> 84/85 degrees in length.
>
> Note: if a ground plane is 1/4 wavelength in radius it becomes a
> counterpoise, and is part of a resonant system in the same way as a 1/4
> wave with radials.  See Jasik - Antenna Engineering Handbook Chapter 22-
> 4.  If the ground plane, as in our case, is non-resonant it is intended
> to work in the same way as an infinite ground plane, and provide an
> image of the radiating element.
>
> To obtain a perfect match to a 50 ohm source a capacitor may be added in
> series, at the feed point, to cancel the inductive component when the
> length has been extended to approx. 130 degees, to increase the
> radiation resistance.

altavoz: Why 130 degree antennas ? When 190's have better pattern,
higher gain ?

altavoz BULL SHIT ! Antenna Makes are the real test . They wont
touch it unless it's produceable and has high gain , your stuff
is theoretical BS.

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:42 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!hammer.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.orst.edu!dogbert.supra.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!delphi.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How to Build A Rhombic?
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 96 00:49:39 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <554ff0$[e-mail]> <555csc$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1d.delphi.com
X-To: Dick Hughes <[e-mail]>

Dick Hughes <[e-mail]> writes:

>something like 8 wave-lengths per leg.  When he hit the switch back in
>the AM days, you had to have everything nailed down in your shack.

Not to speak ill of the deceased but his big signal wasn't all due to the
antennas.


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:43 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.cdsnet.net!news.magicnet.net!feed1.news.erols.com!panix!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Importance of coax length on HF   A myth?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 22:18:45 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <554f6o$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.147.234.30
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

W8JI Tom wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, altavoz
> <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> > Anyway the way to kill it is BALUN,steel wool, ferrite,
> >cut coax to a particular length ( narrow BW), or offset feed
> >the antenna ( bal ant has an unbal' point where you can hook
> >coax, and pattern does not suffer ).
>
> Did you say a steel wool balun? Now we are talking LOW frequency, like
> below audio!
>
> Did you say a balanced antenna has a unbal point where you can hook it up
> with no pattern distortion? Now we are talking an impossible to find
> point.
>
> 73 Tom

altavoz: Impossible ? Sorry to hear that. Just look at the way
the J pole matches and you'll grasp it.
If your 2meter yagi put a dime sized spot on a point
10 miles down the road and one day you had PATTERN DISTORTION,
you could justifiably be upset ( gain from 100db to zero db) ,
but in antennas we dont get upset on a small pattern
change that can be compensated for.
  It will still be the familiar doughnut with very minor changes.


A .6 wl ant must have a .6 wl radial system.

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:44 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 22:30:49 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <5565da$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.147.234.30
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Fractenna wrote:
>
> Actually, I have found Cecil to be thoughtful, reasonable, and open
> minded; I find his attitude refreshing.
>
> 73
> Chip N1IR



altavoz: AAHHHH lovers

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:45 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 22:34:47 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.147.234.30
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Cecil Moore wrote:
>
> Joel Govostes <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> >I'm wondering what is so special about the 5/8 wave antenna length; why
>
> Hi Joel, a 5/8 vertical with a good ground or a 2x5/8 dipole
> has the maximum gain available from wire with no other
> components.

altavoz: You're wrong . A .6 wl needs a .6 wl RADIAL SYSTEM.
Read my post on Paul H. Lee page 84 on radials on a half wave.



Joel , the pattern of a .6wl antenna is much greater on the horizon
than a .25wl antenna ( and a .5wl ant'), in spite of the minor lobe.



> 73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC

--

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:47 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!super.zippo.com!zdc-e!feed1.news.erols.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 22:39:50 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <550jh5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.147.234.30
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Fractenna wrote:
>
> A 5/8 wave OVER A VERY LARGE GROUND PLANE offers 3 dB gain over a 1/4
> wave. As you gathered, however, it is NOT a resonant antenna.
>
> With a counterpoise or small GP, very little gain is had (if any) over a
> 1/4 wave.( I'm not going to play games with one individual on this
> matter--play with your own GP and report the results.)
>
> 73
>
> Chip N1IR


altavoz: We dropped the use of the word RESONANT years ago.
It's meaningless. We use Q . Q is rate of change of reactance
over frequency . A .5wl ant has many times greater Q than a
.25 wl ant' . It takes very little stretching to turn
a 2000+j00 .5wl ant into a 200-J100 antenna .
It takes 10 times that freq change to change the R in
a .25wl ant'

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:48 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 22:46:02 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <550jh5$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <5550of$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.147.234.30
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Cecil Moore wrote:
>
> altavoz wrote:
> > altavoz: It's there , you are too inexperienced to spot it.
>
> Does anybody else suspect ............
> 73, Cecil, W6RCA, OOTC  (not speaking for my employer)


altavoz: Are you tearing apart your antennas yet ?
You will find the coils/caps . ha ha ha ha ha

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:49 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.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] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: 31 Oct 1996 01:46:11 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 34
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <559hvj$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (A N
Thompson) writes:

>The taller (1/2- and 5/8-wave) verticals require more
>extensive grounds than does the 1/4-wave vertical.  The
>1/4-wave antenna will outperform a 1/2-wave antenna unless
>an (excellent) ground plane extends out to about 1.5 wave-
>lengths.  The 5/8-wave antenna requires and even more
>extensive ground.
>
>73,
>
>Arliss

As a bit of practical experience, I did broadcast consulting work in the
70's. I had occasion to "sneak" various towers on 160 late at night.

The 280-300 ft towers were always great performers within a few hundred
miles, but stank for 100 mile and longer work. At one site, a 60 ft tall
inverted L beat the 300 ft tower over and over again outside of a few
hundred miles.

At a location in a swampy area, a dipole at 350 ft absolutely killed a 280
ft vertical, yet a 140 ft vertical at my house a few miles came close to
the high dipole.

These are less than ideal comparisons, and I would never claim them to be
conclusive,  but they certainly indicate something.

I walked away with the same gut feeling Arliss expressed. The low wave
angle, coupled with lossy soil (even though it was almost 30 mS/m at the
one site), actually hurts the lower angle skywave signals.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:50 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!newspump.sol.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 22:58:25 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <55861u$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.147.234.30
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Marc Illsley Clarke wrote:
>
> >>>>> "Tom" == Tom Bruhns <[e-mail]> writes:
> In article <55861u$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Tom Bruhns) writ
es:
>
>     Tom> Cecil Moore ([e-mail]) wrote: : Does
>     Tom> anybody else suspect a practical joker in our midst? : Maybe
>     Tom> even one of the regulars willing to open a new account : for
>     Tom> a free trial period?
>
>     Tom> Yes, that occured to me.  Practical joker or just plain
>     Tom> a**h***. I have a short list of possiblities.  Don't make no
>     Tom> nevermind nohow, it won't be long till nobody pays attention
>     Tom> to the soprano. Just hope it doesn't drive away those who
>     Tom> actually contribute to understanding on the group.

altavoz: I am contributing , but assholes like you , lose arguments
and throw a tantrum .

You are wrong , a .5wl needs a .5wl radial system.
Most antennas are not 5000 ohms . ha ha ha ha
A 2000 ohm ant' will be 200 ohms with a very small change
in lenght .
A .25wl ant cant even double/half  its R in .1 wl !!
A .5wl ant has lower gain on the horizon than a .62wl ant
in spite of the fact the .62wl ant' has a minor lobe
much greater than the .5wl .
Changing the length of the radiator and radials on a .25wl
ant will cause gradual changes, on a > .5wl ant the effect
is 10 times greater ( easier to tune).
  Capacitors are not used to tune most antennas cause they
cost much more $, cant be trimmed, and where they're used
there is less gain ( .25 to .5 wl), Break easier, dont
stand up to wx.....


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:52 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!panix!feed1.news.erols.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 23:02:58 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <5565hp$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.147.234.30
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Fractenna wrote:
>
> Hey alatavoz, you are wrong.
>
> You need a sizeable GP to get the 3 dB gain.
>
> Also, I have a 1/4 wave vertical on 3 radials--and that works without a
> ground plane. Its called a 'counterpoise'.
>
> Speaking of attitudes, you do seem to have one.
>
> Chip N1IR

altavoz: See my prior post to notice that i said
the same thing. ha ha ha ha dumb shit !!( counterpoise)

I see many posts "sizeable, substancial....GP for a .5wl antenna.

You are wrong . it needs a .5 wl radial system, not a substancial...
You dont know what you're talking about on half waves.

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:54 1996
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 18:04:00 +1100
From: Andrew Lark <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 5/8 wavelength antenna???
References: <54l85e$[e-mail]> <54ljqj$[e-mail]> <54nv8d$[e-mail]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: 139.134.93.119
Lines: 36
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!qualcomm.com!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!munnari.OZ.AU!metro!metro!asstdc.scgt.oz.au!nsw.news.telstra.net!139.134.5.33!

Bea and Marvin Jones wrote:
>
> [e-mail] wrote:
> : >I am currently studying for my amateur license and am currently using eur
opean
> : >CB band for general comms.  Can any one out there tell me how to make an
> : >5/8 wavelength antenna for the 11 meter band.
>
> : Just buy one. Believe me, by the time you bought all the tubing and other
> : material, you paid more than for a bought one. If you have a good source
> : for tubing, keep it and use it for more exotic bands when you have your
> : ticket.
>
> Don't let him discourage you.  We need fewer licensed appliance
> operators and more experienced Amateur Radio Operators.
>
> Many times I have built something that cost me more than a
> store-bought item.
>
> But, when I was done -- I didn't have a warranty, I had knowledge.
>
> Good luck to you!!  Enjoy the hobby!!
>
> 73
> Jonesy W3DHJ
> __
> SK
>
> --
> Marvin Jones  [e-mail]
> Gunnison, Colorado

Just a quick note to say I love your line about not having a warranty,
but having knowledge! Warranties expire and are a pain in the date to
have looked after, but our own knowledge from homebrewing can never be
lost or revoked!
73's de Andrew Lark (No Lic. just yet!)
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:56 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!tezcat!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 23:04:26 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <5565hp$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.147.234.30
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

altavoz wrote:
>
> Fractenna wrote:
> >
> > Hey alatavoz, you are wrong.
> >
> > You need a sizeable GP to get the 3 dB gain.
>
> altavoz: You need an exact GP not a sizeable one at .6w
>
> > Also, I have a 1/4 wave vertical on 3 radials--and that works without a
> > ground plane. Its called a 'counterpoise'.
>
> altavoz: DUH , a counterpoise is a gnd plane .
>
> > Speaking of attitudes, you do seem to have one.
> >
> > Chip N1IR


altavoz: The one who wins an argument always has an attitude.


______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:58 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!demos!news1.relcom.ru!EU.net!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 23:16:50 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 98
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
                 <555jar$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.147.234.30
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

altavoz wrote:
>
> Mandy Wright wrote:
> >
> > In article <[e-mail]>, altavoz
> > <[e-mail]> writes
> > >W8JI Tom wrote:
> > >>
> > >> In article <[e-mail]>, altavoz
> > >> <[e-mail]> writes:
> > >>
> > >> >altavoz: I know what im talking about , so i made the absolute
> > >> >statement , and i stand by it . Between .25w and .5w you'll need
> > >> >a cap to tune and caps are expensive , so why not not just jump
> > >> >to .6w and a coil does it and the 2nd lobe isnt significant.
> > >> >  What you're not looking at is the pattern (gain). .25w
> > >> >pattern is trash.
> > >>
> > >> Actually the minor lobe of a 5/8 wl is not insignificant, that's why mo
st
> > >> broadcast stations abandoned them by the 30's. On sky wave, the minor l
obe
> > >> arrives back on earth and interferes with the desired signal from the m
ain
> > >> lobe, and gives rise to severe fading.
> > >>
> > >> A 5/8 wl antenna ONLY acheives its' gain when over a very very large
> > >> groundplane, several wavelengths of near perfect ground. Without the la
rge
> > >> perfectly reflecting ground, the 5/8 wl has about the same or slightly
> > >> LESS gain than a 1/2 wl with no reflecting ground.
> > >>
> > >> Any slight matching advantage in matching is offset by these
> > >> disadvantages.
> > >>
> > >> 73 Tom
> > >
> > >altavoz: Read Paul H. Lee page 84 "Am' Rad' Vert' Ant' HB"
> > >As he proves you must have a counterpoise for a 1/2w ant.
> > >A J POLE DOESNT WORK ! IT HAS POOR LOW ANGLE RADIATION .
> > >He says " Actualy the 5/8w vert is better than the 1/2
> > >vert from the standpoints of low angle radiation and feedpoint
> > >impedance.."
> >
> > During 1990/91 myself and a colleague were carrying out tests for  "The
> > Antenna Standards Working Group" in the UK, to devise a method for
> > accurate comparison tests for antennas used for Land Mobile Radio in the
> > VHF and UHF bands. We required a predictable ground plane for use with
> > over a broad band.  After reading the experiments carried out by Myers
> > and Sumner (see Kraus Antennas) with both a square and a circular ground
> > plane, they reasoned partial cancellation will occur as the diagonal is
> > square root 2.  These results were still unpredictable.
>
> >
> > Our reasoning, where the diagonal is twice the shorter side and at least
> > 1/4 a wavelength to the nearest edge( ie 1/2 wavelength to the furthes
> > edge), cancellation should occur.  Use was made of a rectangle with the
> > ratio 1:root3.  This gave smoother results but still showed some
> > variations in the response.  The final test bed consisted of an elipse
> > ratio 2:1, the intention being to avoid any resonances.  The effect of
> > this would be the same as the root 3 rectangle but without any sudden
> > changes in direction, and would give a flatter response.  This test-bed
> > is now in use by several British companies.
>
> altavoz: Does anyone back you up on this ?
> And 2ndly and more important is how does this effect what i
> asid about a .5wl ant needing a .5wl radial system ?
> >
> > Dimensions of 1.25 x 2.5 metres with a 1/4 wave antenna mounted at the
> > centre, were tested at 30 mc/s to 1 g/s.  Impedance measurements carried
> > out and when compared to calculated figures gave errors of less than 10%
> > at 30mc/s , 5% at 50mc/s, 2% above 80mc/s. From 300 mc/s upwards there
> > were no significant errors, tests showed a 1/4 wave radiator has a
> > radiation resistance of approx 37 ohms and the reactance is zero at
> > 84/85 degrees in length.
> >
> > Note: if a ground plane is 1/4 wavelength in radius it becomes a
> > counterpoise, and is part of a resonant system in the same way as a 1/4
> > wave with radials.  See Jasik - Antenna Engineering Handbook Chapter 22-
> > 4.  If the ground plane, as in our case, is non-resonant it is intended
> > to work in the same way as an infinite ground plane, and provide an
> > image of the radiating element.
> >
> > To obtain a perfect match to a 50 ohm source a capacitor may be added in
> > series, at the feed point, to cancel the inductive component when the
> > length has been extended to approx. 130 degees, to increase the
> > radiation resistance.
>
> altavoz: Why 130 degree antennas ? When 190's have better pattern,
> higher gain ?
>
> altavoz BULL SHIT ! Antenna Makes are the real test . They wont
> touch it unless it's produceable and has high gain , your stuff
> is theoretical BS.

altavoz: "......Antenna Makers ....."   NOT  "....Antenna Make..."

You are getting real desparate trying to use HF skip to disprove
the .6wl antenna . On VHF it's the best omni antenna you can get,
and Paul H. Lee proves it works on HF . In fact he has the same
problem with idiots saying verticals dont work on HF !
  Your REDNEC antenna modeling software is in error .


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:02:59 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!tezcat!feed1.news.erols.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Advice on low-noise, low-band receiving antenna???
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 23:34:58 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <55484g$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.147.234.30
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

W8JI Tom wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, altavoz
> <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> >
> >altavoz: You dont top load a 160. You center load and cap hat.
> >Antennas with top loading will have very high voltages at top.
> >  A 160m is the most difficult to get a good pattern. You simply
> >need acres of room and 6 red lights on it !
> >
> >
>
> Gosh, I'd better take down my 160 antennas!'
>
> Seriously top or end loading is best, but you do need (or should use) a
> hat or some other large capacitance at the open end.

altavoz: Top loading is very ineffective , the inductance is very low
per winding and the voltages are very high. See the handbook for
winding helicals ( says dont wind the upper end !) . You must use
a hat above the loading coil.

> In any event, top loading works best ESPECIALLY when the ground suystem is
> less than ideal. Of course NONE of this has anything to do with receiving.
>
> 73 Tom

altavoz: At HF , ur radials are as important as the radiator .
Even mobile , u must figure a way to make effective radials.


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:00 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.magicnet.net!news.supernet.net!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!mr.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!serra.unipi.it!lorenzo.pisoft.it!news
From: Stefano Macerini Papini <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Richiesta INFO "ALL" PKW
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 01:05:48 -0800
Organization: Amateur Radio Station
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp2.pisoft.it
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; I)

Salve a Tutti da Stefano IK5XCT,

Immagino abbiate visto la pubblicita' della "ALL" della PKW,

Volevo sapere secondo voi quali sono i principi di funzionamento di
questa antenna visto che si presenta come un palo di 7.5m diviso
dal piano di massa da un Balum (piano di massa inesistente)

                        Spero in una Vs. risposta su queste news


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:03 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.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: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: 31 Oct 1996 09:38:16 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <559s28$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <55861u$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup584.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <[e-mail]>, altavoz <[e-mail]> writes
:
>Marc Illsley Clarke wrote:


>Capacitors are not used to tune most antennas cause they
>cost much more $, cant be trimmed, and where they're used
>there is less gain ( .25 to .5 wl), Break easier, dont
>stand up to wx.....


Absolutely false.  I've used small chunks of coax cable as gamma match
capacitors in arrays for YEARS at a time and they cost next to nothing, are
so simple to trim it is a no-brainer, have virtually no effect on gain, NEVER
break and hang out in total exposure to the weather for YEARS unattended!

Haven't you ever used a small chunk of coax for a capacitor??????

It's stupidly simple, works wonderfully, even out in the weather for YEARS
and costs only pennies to use!   Just tie the center to one end and the shield

to another and push the shield around on the outside in the near-values to
trim it.  You final the trim with a pair of dikes and tape it.

Presto..   Instant success, but not unless you have played with stuff like
this for real and need to accomplish things cheaply....

Try it; you'll like it!

   :)

//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:03 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.mxol.com!news.tbcnet.com!news.nap.net!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!qualcomm.com!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Robbie Phelan)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: RE:Cross Dipoles
Date: 31 Oct 96 10:16:21 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]



I recently got a request for info on X-dipoles from a chap but the e-mail
address seems incorrect.
Could you try and send again and I will pass on the relevent info..]

The name is Tony WA6LZH..

Try again Tony with your mail address and I will send info..

>I recently constructed cross dipoles for receiving the RS sats on 29Mhz and
it works very well.
>I have a query in relation  to,how high should I have it,in order to obtain
maximum efficiency,is it in 1/4 waves that I can rise it????? .I have it
about  at 4feet off the ground at the moment,only a temporary thing, and I
want to put it higher but want to know if there is a optimum height.
>
>
>Thks in advance.
>
                                              \
                                                \
                          \               \
        \                   \               \
          \                   \                       \
            \ ________  \___________ \
              \                   \    ||||               \
                \          \    ||                  \
                  \          \  ||                    \
                                        ||                      \
                        ||
                        ||
                        ||
                                        ||    __
                                        ||__|_|___
                        ||______ |
                        ||             |
        ____________||______ |_______________
                /                                     \
              / Robbie...EI8ESB                                \
            /       [e-mail]                  \
          /             50Mhz:IC-706,5-Element Tonna,400ASL \
        /                      IO52PQ                                     \



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:05 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!newsfeed.concentric.net!winternet.com!visi.com!hookup!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!news.sgi.com!csulb.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!the-symposium.demon.co.uk!Mandy
From: Mandy Wright <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax Question
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 10:42:35 +0000
Organization: Radio Services
Lines: 24
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <555ivs$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 3.00 <oJPoSssIZV2StO2Ral+KdVy6du>

In article <555ivs$[e-mail]>, William Cann
<[e-mail]> writes
>I have a roll of coax stamped "CG 92 H/U".  I cant seem to find
>anything about it on material I have on hand.  Does anyone know
>the specs on it?
>ie: impedence, loss/100ft and freq limits?
>
>Thanks
>
You're welcome!
Probably mil.spec. no. UR92
Z=50ohm  OD=0.54"  core=7/0.029"  die= polythene  cap= 30pf/ft
vel.f= 0.666
att(dB/100ft)=11 100mc/s  15.6db 200mc/s  19.2 at 300mc/s  27.5 600mc/s
Not suitable above 1gc/s
Data obtained from UK Home Office, Radio Regulatory Dept Listing of
Cable Losses.

Hope this helps
Mandy
(Replying on behalf of my husband, Tim (G1BCR / G9BZW), who hates
computers
despite (or maybe because of) being a practising RF Engineer.)
Sussex  UK


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:06 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!the-symposium.demon.co.uk!Mandy
From: Mandy Wright <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How do you measure radiation resistance?
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 10:44:54 +0000
Organization: Radio Services
Lines: 62
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 3.00 <oJPoSssIZV2StO2Ral+KdVy6du>

In article <[e-mail]>, Edward Oros <[e-mail]> writes
>Hi all,
>
>Can anyone explain how to go about measuring an antenna's
>radiation resistance? I have several designs where the
>feed point resistance is not the same as the radiation
>resistance but I've never seen anything written on how
>to go about determining what the radiation resitance is.
>
>Can anyone help?
>
>
>Ed--AC3L
Actually Altavoz, Chip's correct - he was posting a reply to Tom! HA HA!

But anyway:

Yes you can measure indirectly the radiation resistance.  We devised
this method for use (See reply to WHY Antennas of 5/8 wavelength?) to
determine the following:
1) Resonant frequency of antenna
2) The VSWR or input impedance at that frequency
3) The usable bandwidth between VSWR limits
4) THE RADIATION EFFICIENCY
From 2 and 4 we can determine both the radiation resistance and the loss
resistance.

Equipment
Use of dual directional coupler ie HP778D, detector heads HP420A, VSWR
indicator Marconi 6658 (could use HP415E).
Signal generator
Slotted line

Method
Find and record resonant frequency and VSWR.
Measure input impedance with slotted line.
Refit directional coupler
Tune generator to resonant frequency
Replace antenna with short circuited termination
Calibrate for 0db forward and reflected
Reconnect antenna
Record forward and reflected power indications (Forward should be 0db
and reflected should be minimal)
Fit radiation shield and record fwd and reflected indications (fwd
should be 0db and ref a little below 0db)

We now have direct readings of resonant frequency, VSWR, and input
impedance (this includes radiation resistance and loss resistance).
With the shield in place we obtain the loss resistance and can now
calculate from the ratios radiation resistance.

For further info on radiation shield see H Wheeler The radian sphere
around a small antenna or Chapter 6 of Antenna Engineering Handbook 2nd
Edition Jasik.

I know this is only a summary, email me for more info.

Hope this helps
Mandy
(Replying on behalf of my husband, Tim (G1BCR / G9BZW), who hates computers
despite (or maybe because of) being a practising RF Engineer.)
Sussex  UK


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:07 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!the-symposium.demon.co.uk!Mandy
From: Mandy Wright <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: HELIX I THINK
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 10:46:33 +0000
Organization: Radio Services
Lines: 17
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <01bbc5d3$caae1c00$375292cf@default>
NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 3.00 <oJPoSssIZV2StO2Ral+KdVy6du>

In article <01bbc5d3$caae1c00$375292cf@default>, DAVE ABSHIRE
<[e-mail]> writes
>I just call AES in Tampa asking about helix cable and wanted connectors and
>they didn't have any or couldn't tell me anything about it.
>Does anyone have any info on this cable? It looks like conduit with ribs
>about 1/2 to 3/4 inch in diameter. I have about 150 foot and need a elbow
>or swivel at the bottom of the tower. Its 50 ohm cable.
>                               Thank you
>                               Dave
>
Use  rotating (n) couplers (for Radar Antenna) available from: Suhner or
Radal or Sage.  Try Penstock if in the USA, or Mainline Electronics in
the UK.
Mandy
(Replying on behalf of my husband, Tim (G1BCR / G9BZW), who hates computers
despite (or maybe because of) being a practising RF Engineer.)
Sussex  UK


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:07 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!the-symposium.demon.co.uk!Mandy
From: Mandy Wright <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Wok as reflector?
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 10:47:56 +0000
Organization: Radio Services
Lines: 19
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 3.00 <oJPoSssIZV2StO2Ral+KdVy6du>

In article <[e-mail]>, Jens Goerke
<[e-mail]> writes
>Hi, all!
>
>No, this is not a joke. I was just watching a japanese movie
>(Tampopo) and the thought of using a wok as a reflector for
>UHF or as a parabolic antenna for 10GHz came to me.
>Has anybody ever tried it?
>
>73, Jens, DB9LL
Yes! See UHF Radio Manual (RSGB) Jessop.

He also tried a dustbin/garbage can lid on 10 gc/s.

Best wishes
Mandy
(Replying on behalf of my husband, Tim (G1BCR / G9BZW), who hates computers
despite (or maybe because of) being a practising RF Engineer.)
Sussex  UK


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:08 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!the-symposium.demon.co.uk!Mandy
From: Mandy Wright <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Goniometer feed for bal line ?
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 10:48:58 +0000
Organization: Radio Services
Lines: 28
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <1996Oct29.130802@axp1>
NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 3.00 <oJPoSssIZV2StO2Ral+KdVy6du>

In article <1996Oct29.130802@axp1>, [e-mail] writes
>I am building a no-compromise 105 foot dipole fed with true open
>wire line ( 2" spaced ceramic insulators every 18", with #8 wire, up
>about 80 feet).
>
>Many people seem to feed balanced line with an internal or external 4:1
>balun (usually ferrite or powdered iron toroidial core).  I read that
>this is less than optimum due to operating the balun outside of its
>useful impedance range.
>
>The classic arrangement of a resonant transformer type tuner with either
>goniometer

I presume you are refering to a Variometer, ie a tunable inductor.
A goniometer is an untuned rotating transformer used for angle
measurement in a radio direction finder, fitted between the receiver
input and a pair of loop antenna or an Adcock array.

This might help
> or series capacitor coupling control appears to be the best
>arrangement, but seems to be a lot more trouble;  As a practical matter,
>does the balun feed work well?
>

Mandy
(Replying on behalf of my husband, Tim (G1BCR / G9BZW), who hates computers
despite (or maybe because of) being a practising RF Engineer.)
Sussex  UK


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:09 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!the-symposium.demon.co.uk!Mandy
From: Mandy Wright <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Thru-the-glass ant?
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 10:50:15 +0000
Organization: Radio Services
Lines: 21
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <5555k5$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 3.00 <oJPoSssIZV2StO2Ral+KdVy6du>

In article <5555k5$[e-mail]>, "Robert J. Schmidt"
<"[e-mail]"@polaristel.net> writes
>I am looking to put a thru-the-glass antenna on my truck for 2M or
>2M/440.  Which manufacturer should I go for?  Any experiences??
>
>TNX es 73
>Bob, WA9JDR
>[e-mail]
A range of thru-glass antennas are available from Revco Ltd in the UK
Telephone [phone]

These are available for export or credit card purchase if you are
outside the UK.

Do not mount these through windows with heating elements in the glass.

Hope this helps.
Mandy
(Replying on behalf of my husband, Tim (G1BCR / G9BZW), who hates computers
despite (or maybe because of) being a practising RF Engineer.)
Sussex  UK


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:11 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!the-symposium.demon.co.uk!Mandy
From: Mandy Wright <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 10:51:46 +0000
Organization: Radio Services
Lines: 98
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
 <555jar$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: the-symposium.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Version 3.00 <oJPoSssIZV2StO2Ral+KdVy6du>

In article <[e-mail]>, altavoz
<[e-mail]> writes
>W8JI Tom wrote:
>>
>> In article <[e-mail]>, altavoz
>> <[e-mail]> writes:
>>
>> >altavoz: I know what im talking about , so i made the absolute
>> >statement , and i stand by it . Between .25w and .5w you'll need
>> >a cap to tune and caps are expensive , so why not not just jump
>> >to .6w and a coil does it and the 2nd lobe isnt significant.
>> >  What you're not looking at is the pattern (gain). .25w
>> >pattern is trash.
>>
>> Actually the minor lobe of a 5/8 wl is not insignificant, that's why most
>> broadcast stations abandoned them by the 30's. On sky wave, the minor lobe
>> arrives back on earth and interferes with the desired signal from the main
>> lobe, and gives rise to severe fading.
>>
>> A 5/8 wl antenna ONLY acheives its' gain when over a very very large
>> groundplane, several wavelengths of near perfect ground. Without the large
>> perfectly reflecting ground, the 5/8 wl has about the same or slightly
>> LESS gain than a 1/2 wl with no reflecting ground.
>>
>> Any slight matching advantage in matching is offset by these
>> disadvantages.
>>
>> 73 Tom
>
>altavoz: Read Paul H. Lee page 84 "Am' Rad' Vert' Ant' HB"
>As he proves you must have a counterpoise for a 1/2w ant.
>A J POLE DOESNT WORK ! IT HAS POOR LOW ANGLE RADIATION .
>He says " Actualy the 5/8w vert is better than the 1/2
>vert from the standpoints of low angle radiation and feedpoint
>impedance.."

Hi Altavoz, I like your style.  Do you want a big wooden spoon for
Christmas?! (Hope this translates OK) A little controversy and a lively
exchange of views usually leads to enlightenment all round.

I once heard it said by the Chief Rabbi in the UK "If you win an
argument you've gained nothing, only if you lose an argument can you
learn something" ;)

During 1990/91 myself and a colleague were carrying out tests for  "The
Antenna Standards Working Group" in the UK, to devise a method for
accurate comparison tests for antennas used for Land Mobile Radio in the
VHF and UHF bands. We required a predictable ground plane for use with
over a broad band.  After reading the experiments carried out by Myers
and Sumner (see Kraus Antennas) with both a square and a circular ground
plane, they reasoned partial cancellation will occur as the diagonal is
square root 2.  These results were still unpredictable.

Our reasoning, where the diagonal is twice the shorter side and at least
1/4 a wavelength to the nearest edge( ie 1/2 wavelength to the furthes
edge), cancellation should occur.  Use was made of a rectangle with the
ratio 1:root3.  This gave smoother results but still showed some
variations in the response.  The final test bed consisted of an elipse
ratio 2:1, the intention being to avoid any resonances.  The effect of
this would be the same as the root 3 rectangle but without any sudden
changes in direction, and would give a flatter response.  This test-bed
is now in use by several British companies.

Dimensions of 1.25 x 2.5 metres with a 1/4 wave antenna mounted at the
centre, were tested at 30 mc/s to 1 g/s.  Impedance measurements carried
out and when compared to calculated figures gave errors of less than 10%
at 30mc/s , 5% at 50mc/s, 2% above 80mc/s. From 300 mc/s upwards there
were no significant errors, tests showed a 1/4 wave radiator has a
radiation resistance of approx 37 ohms and the reactance is zero at
84/85 degrees in length.

Note: if a ground plane is 1/4 wavelength in radius it becomes a
counterpoise, and is part of a resonant system in the same way as a 1/4
wave with radials.  See Jasik - Antenna Engineering Handbook Chapter 22-
4.  If the ground plane, as in our case, is non-resonant it is intended
to work in the same way as an infinite ground plane, and provide an
image of the radiating element.

To obtain a perfect match to a 50 ohm source a capacitor may be added in
series, at the feed point, to cancel the inductive component when the
length has been extended to approx. 130 degees, to increase the
radiation resistance.

Has anybody got spare copies of the following that they would like to
lend to Altavoz, I need mine for my business!

Reference Data for Radio Engineers ITT
Antenna Engineering Handbook    Jasik
Antenna Engineering Handbook 2  Johnson and Jasik
Antennas                        Kraus
Antenna Theory and Design Volumes 1 and 2 H Paul Williams ( my mentor!)
Radio Engineering BBC Manual    E K Sandeman
HF Antennas                     Leslie Moxon         (my other mentor!)
VHF Radio                       Keller
Mandy
(Replying on behalf of my husband, Tim (G1BCR / G9BZW), who hates computers
despite (or maybe because of) being a practising RF Engineer.)
Sussex  UK


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:12 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!southwind.net!symbios.com!kthompso.ks.symbios.com!ken.thompson_at_symbios.com
From: [e-mail] (do not send junk e-mail)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 11:00:18
Organization: Symbios Logic
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <5547sm$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kthompso.ks.symbios.com
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev A]

In article <5547sm$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) writ
es:

>The ARRL Antenna Handbook is a very good book as long as you don't depend
>on it for field theory. Once in a while something bad works it's way in,
>but most of it is really good.

Unfortunately the FCC sometimes gets bad information from it for their tests.
When I took my Novice in '88 there was a question with a wrong answer that
looks like its source was the Handbook.

It asked the size of a 220 Mhz antenna.  There is an article in the handbook
of a "practical"  antenna with a matching coil at the base.
This is of course longer than a simple quarterwave radiator would be. Given
the question, the right answer, in context with most study material on
begining antenna theory, would be the quarterwave number.  The FCC test's
right answer was the longer length, matching the construction article in the
handbook.  There was no mention in the question of matching sections or type
of antenna.  Bad question and worse answer.



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:14 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.rns.net!maggie.ionsys.com!news.corpcomm.net!news-out.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!wits.uni.net.za!csir.uni.net.za!uct.uni.net.za!iafrica.com!pipex-sa.net!hole.news.pipex.net!pipex!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!tube.news.pipex.net!pipex!soap.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Joe)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: MW Loop Antenna question
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 11:26:00 GMT
Organization: UUNet PIPEX server (post doesn't reflect views of UUNet PIPEX)
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Joe
NNTP-Posting-Host: ae036.du.pipex.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99f/32.275

I am looking for a design of a loop antenna similar to the KIWA MW
loop. Unfortunately, I can't possibly afford the 350 UKP price of the
KIWA, much as I would like to buy it, so building a similar
design(balanced loop with DG Mosfet amplifier and bandwidth control)
is the only alternative. Has anyone built a design by GF Maynard
called the "WQ medium wave loop"? . This appeared in the UK "Shortwave
magazine" in November 1986, and looks very impressive. However, the
construction is VERY complex, so I would like to gather any opinions
before starting on the project myself.

TIP FOR UK LOOP FANATICS:
Any experimenters with loops might like to know that ARGOS sells a
product called a "TV Turntable" for around 7UKP, which is perfect for
mounting a rotating loop, especially if it's completed project and a
smart appearance is needed. AFAIK it is only available at ARGOS
superstores. I have had difficulty in finding very wide diameter
plastic pipe(12 to 24 inches) or something similar, again for loops.
Any ideas?


Regards,


Joe Kirlew


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:15 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!news.eunet.fi!jjo
From: [e-mail] (Jari Jokiniemi)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Goniometer feed for bal line ?
Date: 31 Oct 1996 12:02:19 GMT
Lines: 17
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <1996Oct29.130802@axp1> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ds10.tekla.fi
In-reply-to: Mandy Wright's message of Thu, 31 Oct 1996 10:48:58 +0000


In article <[e-mail]> Mandy Wright <Mandy@th
e-symposium.demon.co.uk> writes:
   I presume you are refering to a Variometer, ie a tunable inductor.
   A goniometer is an untuned rotating transformer used for angle
   measurement in a radio direction finder, fitted between the receiver
   input and a pair of loop antenna or an Adcock array.

Anyone care to explain what are the electrical differences between a
variometer and a goniometer? I happen to have a <whatever-it-is> which
is composed of two coils. The inner one rotates. The <whatever-it-is>
is from an old ship radio and might well be used for direction
finding. It pretty much looks similart to the <whatever-it-was> that
was referred to me as being a variometer. So how can I tell whether or
not the thing is a variometer or a goniometer?
--
Jari Jokiniemi, [e-mail], OH2MPO, OH3BU
Tekla Oy, Koronakatu 1, 02210 Espoo, [phone]


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:16 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Contrawound Toroidal Helical Antenna (CTHA)
Date: 31 Oct 1996 07:03:10 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 7
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <55a4hu$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

This was in reference to Tom's fractal obsession, which he managed to
incorporate into the CTHA.

Of course, you are not by any means obligated to read my comments.

73
Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:17 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Richiesta INFO "ALL" PKW
Date: 31 Oct 1996 07:33:43 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 5
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <55a6b7$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Can someone translate this, at least roughly?

Thanks!

Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:18 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.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] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: GET FAST CASH
Date: 31 Oct 1996 07:35:38 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 2
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <55a6eq$[e-mail]>
References: <558fal$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

If you want to stop this stuff you need to send an e-mail to the author
telling him--whatever.


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:19 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!feed1.news.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] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: RE: Accelerating Charges
Date: 31 Oct 1996 07:58:24 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 13
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <55a7pg$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

There still seems to be a few around who want some clarification on
radiation from accelerating charges. Any comments on how the electron
knows its accelerating because  of a  changing direction as opposed to
accelerating because of an applied emf (on a straight line)?

I don't believe the derivative of the vector valued function can
distinguish the nature of the acceleration.

Comments?

73

Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:20 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!coopnews.coop.net!super.zippo.com!zdc!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.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] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How do you measure radiation resistance?
Date: 31 Oct 1996 08:43:13 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 4
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <55aadh$[e-mail]>
References: <$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Watta GREAT answer!

73
Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:21 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.bright.net!news
From: Larry DiGioia <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Re;  Rhombic antenna
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 08:43:42 -0500
Organization: Studio - D
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <Pine.OSF.3.95.961030113822.18574D-100000@internet>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: morr1-cs-8.dial.bright.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Dan O'Connell wrote:

> wish. You could even make them "rope yagis" if you have the supports.  I
> also spent an enourmos amount of time computer modeling rhombics. It just
> isnt worth the size, or matching problems. Dan WA7TDZ

   The point is, at VHF, you can go ahead and just build it, and make
adjustments based on performance, faster than you can "calculate" it. I
guess I am just a "trial and error" kind of guy...

||Larry||
--
============================================
Studio  D  Productions      "As seen on TV"
============================================


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:22 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!newspump.sol.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.bctel.net![e-mail]
From: Trace Klassen <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Portable tower on a trailer
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 06:00:38 -0800
Organization: BCTEL Advanced Communications
Lines: 4
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: vcta01m03-128.bctel.ca
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)

Hi there, I have been searching for any info I can find for building a
portable tower on a trailer. Any info you can provide on this would be
great! 73 de Trace VE7GGT
 [e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:23 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!feed1.news.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] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: RE: CTHA
Date: 31 Oct 1996 09:02:37 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 15
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <55abht$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hey Guys,

Let's keep the fractal stuff through e-mail, shall we?

'Fractional topology' is a rather esoteric way of saying fractals.

One comment though--solving Maxwell's equations for recursive functions is
beyond my analytical skills; if this is what it takes to convince you I
suspect you will have problems with wavelets or fractals, or whatever..

That is why I use approximation methods and make measurements.
My e-mail is [e-mail]

73 Chip
N1IR


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:24 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.myriad.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How to Build A Rhombic?
Date: 31 Oct 1996 15:38:21 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <55ah5d$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <554ff0$[e-mail]> <555csc$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup514.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
>Dick Hughes <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>>something like 8 wave-lengths per leg.  When he hit the switch back in
>>the AM days, you had to have everything nailed down in your shack.
>
>Not to speak ill of the deceased but his big signal wasn't all due to the
>antennas.

Neither is the VOA's...  from rhombics...

    :)

         totally in humor

              electricity can do,  so many, many things for you!

                   yes, Corlis, this IS an archer!

//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:25 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!tezcat!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!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: Re;  Rhombic antenna
Date: 31 Oct 1996 15:44:31 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <55ahgv$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <Pine.OSF.3.95.961030113822.18574D-100000@internet> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup514.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <[e-mail]>, Larry DiGioia <[e-mail]> writes:
>Dan O'Connell wrote:
>
>> wish. You could even make them "rope yagis" if you have the supports.  I
>> also spent an enourmos amount of time computer modeling rhombics. It just
>> isnt worth the size, or matching problems. Dan WA7TDZ
>
>   The point is, at VHF, you can go ahead and just build it, and make
>adjustments based on performance, faster than you can "calculate" it. I
>guess I am just a "trial and error" kind of guy...
>
>||Larry||
>--
>============================================
>Studio  D  Productions      "As seen on TV"
>============================================
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

     Perfect coorellation with your work interest!!!
     A thoroughly practical approach to life.........

          Flight of the Phoenix WAS an interesting
          show, even on TV......  "I only make models.."

                :)

//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:27 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!news.bconnex.net!news.abs.net!news.cais.net!news2.cais.com!cais2.cais.com!zut
From: <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: PVC Insulators
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 11:02:58 -0500
Organization: Posted via CAIS Internet <[e-mail]>
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cais2.cais.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

In spite of all the literature I have, nothing specifically addresses
using PVC pipe as an HF insulator.  Word of mouth is that some kinds are
good and others aren't so good, but nobody seems to be able to tell me
which is which. I've also been told that the only problem is the danger of
it melting if the circuit gets hot. The bottom line is that I don't know
what to believe and am about to abandon the idea of using PVC at all, but
the alternative is to go to the local (expensive) plastics dealer for
Fiberglas, Lexan, or other plastic for insulators.

The project at hand is a remotely tuned center feed for a dipole.  I need
to house the electric screwdriver motor and variable capacitor at the
center and of course, I need something that will handle maximum power and
will withstand the elements.

I would appreciate any references on using PVC pipe in HF applications as
that is the easiest and least expensive to work with, but other guidance
or ideas on housing the remote tuner will also be very much appreciated.

Thanks & 73,
Tony Stalls, K4KYO
[e-mail]

(Please reply directly as I only occasionally visit newsgroups. Thanks.)




From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:28 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!cisnews.cisnet.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: 10 meter beam for sale
Date: 31 Oct 1996 16:06:22 GMT
Organization: CISNet, Inc.
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <55aipu$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: y26.cisnet.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

Cushcraft 3 element 10 meter beam. Also have Alliance HD rotor.
Priced to sell.


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:28 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!cisnews.cisnet.com!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Rotor for sale
Date: 31 Oct 1996 16:07:35 GMT
Organization: CISNet, Inc.
Lines: 2
Message-ID: <55ais7$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: y26.cisnet.com
X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)

Alliance HD rotor. Priced to sell.
Also have Cushcraft 3 element beam for 10m.


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:29 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.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: Is a Power Divider Necessary for a Phased Array?
Date: 31 Oct 1996 11:16:28 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 31
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <55ajcs$[e-mail]>
References: <5585e2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <557s5l$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Patrick Tatro) writes:

>
>  IÆm putting together a 2 element phased array
>for 160 meters. IÆve used ELNEC to  model center
>loaded elements 30 feet tall and spaced 30 feet
>apart with very interesting  results.  IÆm
>developing an auto-tuner for each element to allow
>maximum band coverage and plan to use lengths of
>coax to create the phase shift.

Remember the model won't include any losses, such as matching and ground
losses, unless you put them in. Any ground connection is considered
perfect.

Expect to have loss, not gain, with 30 feet of spacing and a 30 ft tall
element. Especially if the verticals are base loaded or tuned.

>   IÆm afraid that the whole thing wont work
>because of power imbalance in the two elements.

The elements have to have equal amounts of radiation, not power. If the
elements are identical equal radiation will happen with equal current IN
EACH ELEMENT, not equal power in the feedline to each element.

But before you go far, consider losses carefully. Without proper
modelling, you might invent a magical antenna that just won't live up to
expectations.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:32 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news.ibm.net.il!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.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] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How to Build A Rhombic?
Date: 31 Oct 1996 11:16:29 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 32
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <55ajct$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dick
Hughes) writes:

>>transmitters!  Rhombics are NOT passe as some have suggested.  (some
>>writers have insisted).  They do have certain advantages.
>>
>>    -=Tony=-    W6ANV       San Francisco, CA
>>

Tony's right.

On the plus side, Rhombics are easy to construct, and operate over wide
bandwidths with low SWR. The are forgiving of construction errors, and
mechanically simple. They easily handle very high power levels, since they
have (when terminated) no voltage or current peak.

On the minus side, they are very inefficient both in space requirements
and power loss compared to other radiators having the same beamwidth.
Power is mainly lost in the ground below the antenna and in minor lobes.
making it impossible to achieve theoretical gain. A terminated Rhombic, if
these losses didn't exist, would lose 3 dB just in the termination. With
all losses included, they generally lose about 6 - 8 dB from theoretical
in these losses.

General Dynamics measured Rhombics and Vee's on a test range, and found
upper gain was limited to 12 dBd (with the dipole at the same height) with
about 3.3 to 4 wl maximum leg length.

They do fit applications where simplicity, high power handling, and wide
bandwidths are required. So they certainly have some advatages.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:33 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!news.ucdavis.edu!rocky.ucdavis.edu!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Michael Bruss)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Fwd: Tower Safety
Date: 31 Oct 1996 16:28:58 GMT
Organization: University of California, Davis
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <55ak4a$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rocky.ucdavis.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [UNIX 1.3 950824BETA PL0]

[e-mail] wrote:
: [e-mail] (FORREST GEHRKE) wrote:
:
:
: >its more famous pictures.  One of them was of a 1500 ft.
: >tower on its way down with three fellows clinging to
: >the side of it at about 1000 ft.  The camera caught the
: >scene when the tower was at 45 degrees.
:
: >With no recourse for those workers when an accident occurs
: >at such heights, shouldn't they be carrying those parachute
: >backpacks you see stunt artists use for directed landings?
:
: When I first heard about the recent fall of that tower in Texas, I
: wondered why they don't wear chutes too. Modern parachutes are not
: nearly as large and cumbersome to wear as they were years ago, and
: 1000 to 1500 ft. is plenty high enough to deploy the chute. Does
: anyone know why they are not used on these tall towers?
: 73,
: Butch N2YMJ

In the overwhelming majority of cases, the worker would not be able to get
far enough from the tower to deploy the chute effectively before the
ground jumped up and bit him.  The worker
would have to disengage the safety belt under very difficult
circumstances and jump clear of the tower and guy wires.  Considering the
cost of chutes, the enormous training and re-training costs, and the
accident rate during training, it would be far better to spend more $ and
effort in preventing collapses in the first place.

Mike


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:34 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.comet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!interpath!news.interpath.net!news.interpath.net!news
From: [e-mail] (Curt Phillips)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Coax as a balanced feeder?
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 17:00:46 GMT
Organization: Mystic Knights of the Sea
Lines: 58
Message-ID: <55alm6$[e-mail]>
References: <54rdmc$[e-mail]> <54t7i7$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: cphillips.pdial.interpath.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
>In article <54rdmc$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Curt
>Phillips) writes:
>>  The theory that I read said that, with the coax shields grounded and tied
>>together, that the "twin lead conductors" (i.e., the two center
>conductors
>>of the two pieces of coax) would appear (electrically) to be infinitely far
>>apart.  Therefore, the impedance would be the same as a ladder line or
>>twin-lead with, say 20 foot spacing between their conductors.  Therefore,
>>it seems as though they were claiming an impedance of 1000 ohms, or
>>something in that range... something appropriate for "ladder line" with
>>extremely wide spacing.

>The center conductor only interacts with the shield, and the shield
>interacts with the outside world. If the center is excited and the shield
>is floated, the effect is almost exactly the same as if you were feeding
>the shields. So if the shields float the line looks FAT and as if it had
>the physical spacing of the shields.

>If the shields are connected at each end normal transmission line type
>currents (differential mode) cancel on the outside of the shields, all
>transmission current stays inside each cable, and the impedance is the sum
>of the two cables. Loss remains fixed at the value of one cable alone. (If
>the SWR is unity in both cases.)

  One reason people talk about using two coax cables in this way is because
of the "requirement" that ladder-line be kept away from other metal.
Sometimes in routing the ladder-line into your shack, close proximity to
metal is hard to avoid.
  This "twin coax" arrangement has been touted as a good way to get around
that.  In other words, run ladder-line where you can, switch to "twin-coax"
to get through the trouble areas, then connect into the antenna tuner or
switch back to ladder-line for the remainder of the run (if it is
substantial).  It would be an interesting exercise to calculate the
resulting impedance.
  From using ladder line fed antennas in far from optimal conditions, I
suspect that this is not as important or crucial as some people may say.
Perhaps if you want the pattern of the dipole to be exactly according to
the book, but then it needs to be at least 1/2 wave high, etc, etc.
  In my experience, a good antenna tuner can 'chew up' the results of a few
"less than optimal" conditions.  After all, Kurt Sterba has loaded a couple
of shopping carts with his.  Of course, the effectiveness and radiation
pattern might be hard to predict.

  So I guess a good maxim (or Murphy's 25th law) is:

  A good antenna tuner cures all ills.  :-)

  Thanks to everyone who has contributed to this thread.  It has been
interesting and educational.  (BTW, I'm a ME, not an EE. :-)

========= Opinions expressed are solely those of the author ========
Curt Phillips, CEM KD4YU (ex-WB4LHI)   |    Hey, Bill & Hillary!
Engineer/Writer/Hurricane Fran survivor| Where's that middle class
Chairman, Tar Heel Scanner/SWL Group   |  tax cut you promised
ARRL Life; QCWA; Raleigh ARS; RCMA; NRA|   us in 1992?
==== [e-mail] == [Copyright 1996 All rights reserved]====




From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:35 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-ana-7.sprintlink.net!super.zippo.com!zdc-e!feed1.news.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: Accelerating Charges
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 09:01:02 -0800
Organization: none
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <55a7pg$[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)

Fractenna wrote:
>
> There still seems to be a few around who want some clarification on
> radiation from accelerating charges. Any comments on how the electron
> knows its accelerating because  of a  changing direction as opposed to
> accelerating because of an applied emf (on a straight line)?
>
> I don't believe the derivative of the vector valued function can
> distinguish the nature of the acceleration.
>

The Lorentz force equation involves an electron drift velocity v and a
transverse  magnetic field B. This force is centripetal and involves the
cross product v X B. Since the force is at right angles to the direction
of the charge no energy is added to the particle but it accelerates
toward the center of its circular path.  If and only if the drift
velocity of the particle approaches the speed of light there is a loss of
energy due to synchrotron radiation.

Bill W0IYH


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:36 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-3.sprintlink.net!dallasI5.dallas.net!news
From: Jim <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Line Parms: Semi-rigid 141, 085 parms
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 09:37:30 -0800
Organization: Jim
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: aux71.plano.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)

I am in need of attenuation and velocity factor
constants for .141" and .085" semi-rigid cable.

My old ITT Ref Data for Radio Engs doesn't
have anything.

Freq range on interest: 1.2 to 1.3 GHz

I can use values for the range of 400 MHz to
2 GHz and interpolate if necessary - anything
as a start.

If anybody has any Touchstone parms like ER,
TAND (Dielectric Loss Tangent) and RHO these
are what I am really in need of but can
utilize VF and dB/100' (or m) to determine
these parms.

Thanks in advance.

Jim


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:37 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!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: Thru-the-glass ant?
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 10:56:48 -0700
Organization: Libelle Productions, Inc., Minden, Nevada USA
Lines: 10
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <5555k5$[e-mail]> <[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 (Macintosh; I; 68K)

David Cooley wrote:
>
> band... My only problem now is that I removed it from the last car it
> was in, and can't find a source for the "Sticky" on the glass mounts to
> mount it in my new car! Any leads are welcome!

Remount kits are a standard Larsen part.  They are listed in the current
AES catalog as part #KG-Reinstall for $5.20
--
Dick Flanagan W6OLD CFII ([e-mail]) Minden, Nevada


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:38 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!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] (JAMES MCEWEN)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: 31 Oct 96 18:20:04 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

     ***********************************************************

     The Wiz of altaOZ wrote:
     altavoz: We dropped the use of the word RESONANT years ago.
     It's meaningless. We use Q . Q is rate of change of reactance
     over frequency .

     ***********************************************************


     Wiz, I just don't understand what you said here.

     For instance:  In a series RLC circuit

                XsubL = 2Pi_f_L  so by your statement

                 Q  =  dt(2Pi_f_L)/f


                    since 2Pi & L are constant
                    they can come outside the function


                 Q  = 2PiL dt(f)/f  = 2PiL (1) = a constant

                 Are you saying that Q = 2PiL  ?


      I think by the definition of Q, it is a meaningful number only
     at the resonant frequency.  In a series RLC circuit Q is defined
     as:

               Q = (2Pi_f-sub-r_L)/R where f-sub-r is the resonant
     frequency and R is the series resistance of the circuit.


     So going back to your original statement quoted at the top of
     this posting, what were you trying to explain?

     Jim KA6TPR



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:40 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news3.epix.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!crusty.teleport.com!nntp0.teleport.com!ip-pdx19-29
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 96 18:39:54 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 76
Message-ID: <55arq1$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx19-29.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Joel Govostes) wrote:
>Here's an antenna question that I've never found an explanation for --
>
>For mobile or fixed station use, a typical vertical antenna is 1/4 wave
>and fed with low-impedance coaxial cable.  The ground is provided by earth
>ground, automobile body, or a set of "ground plane" elements.  Okay.
>
>This type of antenna matches 50-ohm coax and transmitter output circuits
well.
>
>So, who came up with the oddball figure of 5/8 wave for vertical antennas,
>and why?
>
>I know that the radiation pattern shape is somewhat "squashed" on the 5/8
>wave, and that it provides some gain over the 1/4 wave.  But 5/8
>wavelength doesn't match 50 ohm coax feed, and so usually it is fed on a
>loading-coil tap at the base of the vertical.
>
>I'm wondering what is so special about the 5/8 wave antenna length; why
>not just a 1/2 wave (4/8 wave)?  Could 1/2 wave vertical be fed in a
>similar way, and would it also provide significant gain over the 1/4
>wave?  Why not just go to 6/8-wave size, as that would match coax feed as
>3/4 wave (odd multiple of 1/4 wave ~ approx. 50 ohms.)          Thanks

Imagine putting a vertical on a perfect ground plane, flat and infinite in
extent. Start with a very short vertical, just a small fraction of a
wavelength high, and look at the radiation pattern. From an infinitesimal
height to a height of 1/4 wavelength, the pattern and gain change very
little. (There's less than 0.5 dB change in gain, and a correspondingly
small change in pattern shape. Remember we're neglecting losses here.) The
pattern is just 1/2 that of a dipole of twice the length in free space, the
familiar donut pattern. As the height of the vertical increases from 1/4 to
1/2 wavelength, the donut flattens, increasing the gain at the horizon as
it decreases at higher angles. The gain of a 1/2 wavelength vertical over
a perfect ground is about 2 dB greater than a 1/4 wave vertical. As the
antenna increases in height above 1/2 wavelength, a lobe appears at 60
degrees above the horizon. Just above 1/2 wavelength, it's still small and
doesn't represent much of the antenna's total energy output, but grows as
the height increases. The horizon lobe continues to get narrower and
stronger as the antenna lengthens above 1/2 wavelength, until it reaches
about 5/8 wavelength. At this point, the gain at the horizon is about 3 dB
greater than a 1/4 wavelength vertical. The 60-degree lobe is significant
at this point, which is why the 5/8 wave antenna isn't used by
broadcasters. The signal from the upper lobe can arrive at a listening
station via skywave, cancelling the desired groundwave signal if the two
arrive out of phase.

If the vertical height is increased beyond about 5/8 wavelength, the
horizon lobe decreases as the 60 degree lobe increases, so the gain at the
horizon is maximum at a height of about 5/8 wavelength -- about 3 dB
greater than a 1/4 wavelength vertical. This is why the "magic" length.

This analysis was done with a perfect ground which real ground never is. At
HF, you'll probably see less than 3 dB gain (relative to a 1/4 wave
vertical) from a 5/8 wave radiatior. This is because the ground absorbs
low-angle reflections from vertically polarized antennas. Since a larger
fraction of the radiation from the 5/8 wave vertical is at very low angles,
a larger fraction of it is absorbed. The actual gain difference is a
function of the ground conductivity, dielectric constant, and frequency.
A 1/4 wave vertical will actually have more gain at some low angles than a
5/8 wave for some ranges of ground characteristics and frequency.

You can see this for yourself with any of the modeling programs, including
the ELNEC demo available from ftp.teleport.com/pub/vendors/w7el as
ELNECDEM.EXE. ("Running" it expands it into several files, including a
READ.ME file.) I believe it's also available via WWW.

I haven't had a chance to model 5/8 wave antennas over abbreviated ground
planes (such as a car top), but think there's reason to believe that the 3
dB gain advantage may not be realized when the antennas are mounted on an
abbreviated ground plane. There was an interesting paper on this topic
titled "The 5/8-Wavelength Antenna Mystique", by Donald K. Reynolds, K7DBA,
in the ARRL Antenna Compendium, Vol. 1.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:42 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.voicenet.com!netaxs.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!crusty.teleport.com!nntp0.teleport.com!ip-pdx19-29
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Contrawound Toroidal Helical Antenna (CTHA)
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 96 18:46:21 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <55as62$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx19-29.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <[e-mail]>,
   "C.D.Sage" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>Greetings,
> I posted to this group a while back regarding the Contrawound Toroidal
>Helical Antenna and promised to keep those interested in it's development
>updated. Attached is a recent news release that you may find of interest.
> Regards,
> C.D.Sage

> [press release]

Like the information I was faxed some time ago, I found this to be totally
lacking in objective content. It appears to be marketing-generated PR, in
an apparent attempt to get people to invest in your company.

If you have any objective data about the antenna (surely you do?), such as

  Gain
  Efficiency
  Pattern
  Input impedance

please post them here. These would be appropriate for this group. In my
opinion, the press release would be more appropriately posted in
alt.invest.makemoneyfast or similar newsgroups.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:44 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!crusty.teleport.com!nntp0.teleport.com!ip-pdx19-29
From: [e-mail] (Roy Lewallen)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Is a Power Divider Necessary for a Phased Array?
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 96 19:04:12 GMT
Organization: EZNEC Antenna Software
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <55at7i$[e-mail]>
References: <5585e2$[e-mail]> <55ajcs$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-pdx19-29.teleport.com
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3

In article <55ajcs$[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (W8JI  Tom) wrote:
>In article <557s5l$[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
>(Patrick Tatro) writes:
>
>>
>>  IÆm putting together a 2 element phased array
>>for 160 meters. IÆve used ELNEC to  model center
>>loaded elements 30 feet tall and spaced 30 feet
>>apart with very interesting  results.  IÆm
>>developing an auto-tuner for each element to allow
>>maximum band coverage and plan to use lengths of
>>coax to create the phase shift.
>
>Remember the model won't include any losses, such as matching and ground
>losses, unless you put them in. Any ground connection is considered
>perfect.
>
>Expect to have loss, not gain, with 30 feet of spacing and a 30 ft tall
>element. Especially if the verticals are base loaded or tuned.

Actually, the gain relative to a single element can in some cases be
greater when loss is greater.

The 90-degree phased, 90-degree spaced antenna is an interesting special
case. For this antenna, the gain relative to a single element will always
be 3 dB, regardless of the loss. This assumes that both elements are
identical and have the same amount of loss.

(Cf. Jasik's description of "coupled resistance" in chapter 20. This array
has a total "coupled resistance" of zero, so the overall efficiency is the
same as for a single element. Or see it for yourself with EZNEC or ELNEC.)

If you have two identical elements which are spaced far enough apart so the
fields can totally reinforce in some direction (see Fig. 12 in Chapter 8 of
the ARRL Antenna Book), and the two elements are driven with equal
magnitude currents, the gain relative to a single element will always
approach 3 dB relative to a single element as the loss per element gets
very large. This is because the gain is 3 dB in the absence of mutual
coupling, and when loss is large, the effect of mutual coupling is swamped
by the loss. So, the gain of a 2-element array with elements spaced 1/2
wavelength and fed in phase will decrease from 3.8 dB to 3 dB as loss goes
from zero to a high value. If they're fed out of phase, the gain will
increase from 2.3 dB to 3 dB as loss increases. (All gains relative to a
single element with the same loss.)

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:45 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!hammer.uoregon.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: Advice on low-noise, low-band receiving antenna???
Date: 31 Oct 1996 14:07:04 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 17
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <55atco$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

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

>
>altavoz: Top loading is very ineffective , the inductance is very low
>per winding and the voltages are very high. See the handbook for
>winding helicals ( says dont wind the upper end !) . You must use
>a hat above the loading coil.

A helically loaded antenna (distributed loading) is one of the most
inefficient methods of loading an antenna. The most efficient radiators
carry uniform in phase current over the entire length of the radiator.

Please tell me the source of your claims, it is a book we should work to
get corrected.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:46 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.cdsnet.net!news.magicnet.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.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] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: How do you measure radiation resistance?
Date: 31 Oct 1996 14:08:01 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 62
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <55ateh$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hi Mandy (or Tim).

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

>Yes you can measure indirectly the radiation resistance.  We devised
>this method for use (See reply to WHY Antennas of 5/8 wavelength?) to
>determine the following:
>1) Resonant frequency of antenna
>2) The VSWR or input impedance at that frequency
>3) The usable bandwidth between VSWR limits
>4) THE RADIATION EFFICIENCY
>From 2 and 4 we can determine both the radiation resistance and the loss
>resistance.
>
>Equipment
>Use of dual directional coupler ie HP778D, detector heads HP420A, VSWR
>indicator Marconi 6658 (could use HP415E).
>Signal generator
>Slotted line
>
>Method
>Find and record resonant frequency and VSWR.
>Measure input impedance with slotted line.
>Refit directional coupler
>Tune generator to resonant frequency
>Replace antenna with short circuited termination
>Calibrate for 0db forward and reflected
>Reconnect antenna
>Record forward and reflected power indications (Forward should be 0db
>and reflected should be minimal)
>Fit radiation shield and record fwd and reflected indications (fwd
>should be 0db and ref a little below 0db)

The rub is the radiation shield. You must be very careful the shield has
no loss, or that you at least know the loss. The shield must also be
outside the physical area where nearfield effects are noticable, and that
is quite a distance (usually a few antenna lengths away.

If you do all that, you know the somewhat useless quantity known as
radiation resistance.

While your method is correct, unlike the methods foolishly insisting it is
the feedpoint's resistive value, it is still somewhat out of reach for
most Hams.

73 Tom
>We now have direct readings of resonant frequency, VSWR, and input
>impedance (this includes radiation resistance and loss resistance).
>With the shield in place we obtain the loss resistance and can now
>calculate from the ratios radiation resistance.
>
>For further info on radiation shield see H Wheeler The radian sphere
>around a small antenna or Chapter 6 of Antenna Engineering Handbook 2nd
>Edition Jasik.
>
>I know this is only a summary, email me for more info.
>
>Hope this helps
>
>Mandy



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:47 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.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] (W8JI  Tom)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: 31 Oct 1996 14:08:35 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 22
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <55atfj$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

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

>You are getting real desparate trying to use HF skip to disprove
>the .6wl antenna . On VHF it's the best omni antenna you can get,
>and Paul H. Lee proves it works on HF . In fact he has the same
>problem with idiots saying verticals dont work on HF !
>  Your REDNEC antenna modeling software is in error .

Altavoz,

Please quit taking mushrooms and take some thorazine. If you keep chasing
rabbits you'll keep falling through holes and even Paul H. Lee won't be
able to save you from the men on the chess board.

I suggest you put on some stereo headphones, and listen to Jefferson
Airplane CD's, or perhaps Cream or the White Album. Stay away from the
computer until you crash.

A "Big Hug" from your dear friend across town...

Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:49 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.abs.net!cs.umd.edu!ra.nrl.navy.mil!usenet
From: Bill Harwood <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Spider HF antenna
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 12:00:38 -0800
Organization: Naval Research Laboratory
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bill_harwood.chinalake.navy.mil
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Macintosh; I; PPC)
To: James Hilliard <[e-mail]>

James Hilliard wrote:
>
> Has anyone had any experience with the Spider multiband
> HF mobil antenna?  What do you think of it?
>
> Mark Hilliard, N2HHR
> [e-mail]


They work great!!!!

I recommend that you get the Marine Stainless Stell Mast rather than the
aluminum one.

It works real good with a feed point tuner to get full bandwidth (i.e.
AH-2, AH-3 and SGC-230)

I use a marine coller (from Multiband) to add 12 and 17 resonators.

I use bungi cords to limit the sway and protect the mount.

I have about 75,000 miles on one.

Good Luck,

Bill Harwood
AB6DY


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:50 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.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: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: 31 Oct 1996 15:17:46 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 12
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <55b1ha$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

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

>altavoz: I am contributing , but assholes like you , lose arguments
>and throw a tantrum .

There is no need for this, unless you are two years old. Atavoz, please
talk nicer.

All that does is make you look dumb.

73 Tom


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:51 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-stk-3.sprintlink.net!buffnet2.buffnet.net!usenet
From: "Gary C. Wysocki" <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: TV antenna for 6m.
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 15:28:45 -0500
Organization: Canisius College - Little Theatre
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: fppp3.buffnet.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)

Curt Sanders wrote:
>
> I need feedback on anyone who has used a TV antenna for 6m.
> I intend to use a tuner with no more than 10 watts PEP SSB/CW (at this time)
.
> The reason: I have a landlord who will permit only TV antennas.
> Please email me or post in this newsgroup.
>
> Thanks es 73 de N3TLJ
> www.QTH.com/N3TLJ

I have a question along the same lines... I just picked up a 3 element
6m Yagi and want to mount it on the same mast/rotor as our TV/FM Yagi.
Is this a good or a bad idea?  There's plenty of mast to get the two
antennas a couple feet apart, and I really can't afford to buy another
rotor, etc, for the 6m ant.  I've got a tuner for the 6m rig so if the
TV antenna detunes the 6m antenna, I should be able to correct it.  Any
suggestions?

                                                Gary C. Wysocki
                                                N2WLS


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:51 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!newspump.sol.net!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!dgf
From: [e-mail] (David Feldman)
Subject: Yagi etched on PC stock of known dielectric
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Organization? Me?
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 20:28:51 GMT
Lines: 10
Sender: [e-mail]

Do any of the yagi modelling programs allow for the yagi to be etched
onto PC board stock of known dielectric, rather than having the elements
in free space? I have in mind a small yagi etched onto single sided PC
board, but I'm not sure where to find any reference material or modelling
programs with which to start.

Thanx,

73 Dave WB0GAZ [e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:52 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.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] (WayDaBe37)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Who Makes the best Quad?
Date: 31 Oct 1996 15:50:42 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 5
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <55b3f2$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (WayDaBe37)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hello To All,
 Would like input on who makes the best 3band 2element HF Quad. Appreciate
your input.
73
Tim,KC7QOM


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:54 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!newspump.sol.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] (WayDaBe37)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Coax as ground wire.
Date: 31 Oct 1996 15:55:14 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 9
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <55b3ni$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (WayDaBe37)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hello to All,
 I read an article in September 73 magazine concerning using coax for long
runs to ground. It stated that if i bridged the shield to the center
conductor with 2 .001uf 1Kv disc capacitors that it would give a ground
length of only a few inches no matter what the coax length. Is this true?
Anyone tried it? Would sure like to have a good ground from my 3rd floor
shack!
73
Tim,KC7QOM


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:55 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (JAMES MCEWEN)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: New Vertical Dipole Design Released
Date: 31 Oct 96 21:01:11 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 70
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]


     Lets go back to this original idea for the J-Pole.  Please look
     at this method and lets talk about how to make it work.

     We start with a shorted 1/4 *L* (Lambda or wavelength) section of
     twinlead or open wire.  We can construct this pretty easily,and


     a |--------------------------c
     b |--------------------------d
     short at  a-b.  open at c-d

     using a dip meter, we can be pretty sure it is resonant at our
     frequency of interest.  This is a parallel resonant circuit (Yes
     Wiz, a tank circuit).

     Now we select a point that has an impedance of 50 ohms.  If we
     select the real 50 ohm point, it will be a 50+j0 load on a 50 ohm
     coax feeder.  If a SWR meter is placed in the feedline, it should
     indicate close to a  1:1 SWR at our resonant frequency.

              e
     a |-------\-------------------c
     b |-------\\------------------d
              f \\
                  \\---coax-------SWR mtr--------Signal source

     If it doesn't, we find where it does indicate SWR 1:1 and
     shorten-lengthen our twinlead to bring it back to our resonant
     freq. and move the tap point to get SWR of 1:1.  At this point we
     want to measure the Q. We can get an idea of this by finding the
     1:3 SWR points.


                                 ___________ 1/2 *L* (maybe)____
              e                 |z
     a |-------\-------------------c
     b |-------\\------------------d
              f \\
                  \\---coax-------SWR mtr--------Signal source

     Now by tradition, an end fed 1/2 *L* radiator is used as the
     load, because it has a high impedance.  If we attach this 1/2 *L*
     radiator to our parallel circuit(tank coil) at a high impedance
     point, we should not change the resonant frequency (much?), but
     we will change the Q because we will be taking energy out of the
     tank coil. We can find the 1:3 SWR points again to confirm this.
     There appears to be no reason a 1/4 *L* or 5/8 *L* radiator can't
     be used, by selecting the proper tap point, but they will take
     more current and reduce the Q more, and maybe change the resonant
     point more, requiring more adjustment of the 50 ohm match point.

     So the question is, which length of end fed antenna radiates best
     without a ground connection?

     Yep, Tom, W8JI, seems to be the winner in this discussion.  His
     original contention was that the radiator has a poor pattern
     because it doesn't have a good ground.  The tapped tank coil
     output configuration is shown in many old radio books,and used
     with W.W.II vintage tube type transmitters, but always with a
     ground connection.  This may explain why copper J-Poles, with the
     "cold end" (the A-B in the dwg) attached to a metal support or
     made from a long section of copper pipe seem to work well.  This
     section provided the ground (or counterpoise) that is necessary
     for a more efficient radiator.

     Now, rip my heart out.<G>

     Jim  KA6TPR



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:57 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!qualcomm.com!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Rick Markey)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: RE: Larsen On-Glass Removal and Reinstallation
Date: 31 Oct 96 21:38:11 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 62
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]


------ =_NextPart_000_01BBC74A.06B73D40
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

        The reinstall kit for the Larsen On-Glass series is called the =
KG-REINSTALL and retails for about 5 bucks.  Whatever you do, don't go =
to the hardware store and buy the glue used to reinstall automobile rear =
view mirrors.  It doesn't work!  Heed the warning about temperature when =
you reinstall the antenna.  If it's too cold, the glue doesn't set up =
properly and the antenna falls off, usually at the worst possible time.

        To remove an On-Glass antenna, take a wide blade putty knife, slip it =
under a corner and gently pop the assembly off the glass.  Just be =
careful not to gouge the windshield.

        One caveat.  A couple of the locals proudly installed their new =
On-Glass antennas on the rear window of their mini vans, only to =
discover they forgot to allow for the rear windshield wiper!  They took =
a lot of heckling.  And no, if you pop the antenna off before the glue =
sets and attempt to stick it back on, IT  WILL FALL OFF!=20

de Rick, KN3C
------ =_NextPart_000_01BBC74A.06B73D40
Content-Type: application/ms-tnef
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64

eJ8+IgMVAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAENgAQAAgAAAAIAAgABBJAG
AAwBAAABAAAADAAAAAMAADADAAAACwAPDgAAAAACAf8PAQAAAD8AAAAAAAAAgSsfpL6jEBmdbgDd
AQ9UAgAAAABIYW0tQW50QHVjc2QuZWR1AFNNVFAASGFtLUFudEB1Y3NkLmVkdQAAHgACMAEAAAAF
AAAAU01UUAAAAAAeAAMwAQAAABEAAABIYW0tQW50QHVjc2QuZWR1AAAAAAMAFQwBAAAAAwD+DwYA
AAAeAAEwAQAAABMAAAAnSGFtLUFudEB1Y3NkLmVkdScAAAIBCzABAAAAFgAAAFNNVFA6SEFNLUFO
VEBVQ1NELkVEVQAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAADOisBCIAHABgAAABJ
UE0uTWljcm9zb2Z0IE1haWwuTm90ZQAxCAEEgAEALwAAAFJFOiBMYXJzZW4gT24tR2xhc3MgUmVt
b3ZhbCBhbmQgUmVpbnN0YWxsYXRpb24AjBABBYADAA4AAADMBwoAHwAQACYACwAEAEEBASCAAwAO
AAAAzAcKAB8AEAAfACgABABXAQEJgAEAIQAAAEE0NkU1QTJEM0MzM0QwMTFCOTRFNDQ0NTUzNTQw
MDAwAOQGAQOQBgD4BAAAEgAAAAsAIwAAAAAAAwAmAAAAAAALACkAAAAAAAMANgAAAAAAQAA5AECq
UdBzx7sBHgBwAAEAAAAvAAAAUkU6IExhcnNlbiBPbi1HbGFzcyBSZW1vdmFsIGFuZCBSZWluc3Rh
bGxhdGlvbgAAAgFxAAEAAAAWAAAAAbvHc9BRLVpupTM8EdC5TkRFU1QAAAAAHgAeDAEAAAAFAAAA
U01UUAAAAAAeAB8MAQAAABEAAABycG1hcmtleUBuYm4ubmV0AAAAAAMABhCTgWiwAwAHEOoCAAAe
AAgQAQAAAGUAAABUSEVSRUlOU1RBTExLSVRGT1JUSEVMQVJTRU5PTi1HTEFTU1NFUklFU0lTQ0FM
TEVEVEhFS0ctUkVJTlNUQUxMQU5EUkVUQUlMU0ZPUkFCT1VUNUJVQ0tTV0hBVEVWRVJZT1VEAAAA
AAIBCRABAAAAZQMAAGEDAADkBAAATFpGdVKQBm//AAoBDwIVAqgF6wKDAFAC8gkCAGNoCsBzZXQy
NwYABsMCgzIDxQIAcHJCcRHic3RlbQKDM3cC5AcTAoB9CoAIzwnZO/EWDzI1NQKACoENsQtg4G5n
MTAzFFALChRRHQvyYwBAAzABkSBUaHxlIBYQC4ATwAdAAyBrrmkFQAIQBcB0G1FMEZLhA6BPbi1H
C2AEERGw5wiBBCAEACBjG+EJgByTAEtHLVJFSU5T4FRBTEwgAHAe0BYQfwGQAxAEIBxiAaAIYAVA
NQAgYnVja3MuICwgVxGAE9B2BJAgeSEIYCBkbywiwW4neQVAZ28ckCOBG1ERgWT+dwrAG2ATwAWw
G2AgAiGAynkck2cKQSB1EbAe0ZsjgBuIYSEwA3BvYgMQGxtiCsF2CJAH4G1pcvcDYBGgIdFJBUAi
0AeQIzLSdwWwayEh4EgJ4B7U3yRRAwAZECD1E9FwBJAiIP8IcCqxG1ADoCKSG4gcogBwURPQbm5h
KPJmHkB03icEICOgI4AVgWQi8CWHpylWEbEmAHAgE1BvK+F+bCVgIAItqRxQG+EEIG/3DdAi8CYQ
dRvhMZErkSqi0yjBBUBwbwQQaQJgG2D6dAdxLgqFCoYbAyZyBGCfIlAf8R1ILeUvgWFrJOG9KcBp
DbAhcAtgOUFwITBKdCVgawMAZmUi8HP+bAUgLqEmACAQImEykAWh1m47UiARZwnwdDGBNLD/MQAt
owQQE+ACYCVgMxElddsdoSHRSiYQBUBiG2AegMkWEGZ1AyBubyuRI4AdI3B1PFAqhAuAZHNo/wiQ
L2A1jxsRHVA/MiJQIiD9IdFBLzEw8CexMxAckxWg5x6BBCAxIXVkMYEbpR7E/yiQP8AH0TeeMvED
oByiJ+P9QOJvB+BEJEZRKIADACgg3wBxIvACIDGBI6FkBAAFoP8iUhyhJWAcYSNwP/Mb4Ujh/xxm
SFdBJDkRK+EqERtBSoL8b2s48RWgBUBEIRtQIaD/OrAZEENiIBE/0CLwBpAig/88xzJFPdI/IBxh
QIQlwxGxvzgCHtAiICuyP/MTwGkhoD064mIA0E8wAiAi8ElUFSHhSR/RRh/CT0ZGNyoQQZw5QVJV
ISLwS068M0MK4RnrMSET0GMFQAsKhRUxAFswAAAAAwAQEAAAAAADABEQAAAAAEAABzCgjBfncse7
AUAACDCgjBfncse7AR4APQABAAAABQAAAFJFOiAAAAAAk24=

------ =_NextPart_000_01BBC74A.06B73D40--



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:58 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Contrawound Toroidal Helical Antenna (CTHA)
Date: 31 Oct 1996 17:34:39 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 37
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <55b9hv$[e-mail]>
References: <55as62$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fractenna)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

RE: CTHA parameters

Well, this isn't one of my antennas but I like to see what else is out
there. My point is that for its size its not unbelievable. Ask yourself:
how well can a half-wave in a circular loop work? Deal with the reactance
and start from there.

I am incredibly busy but will probably play with the CTHA again in
January. Will then write it up somewhere. I would prefer to see the CIRA
results in published form from the inventors.

Its easy to build. Just keep in mind that the wire is insulated and the
only place where the 'x's make electrical contact is at the feed point.
The bandwidth is poor and I don't believe it was good enough for cellular
AMPS. Perhaps the CIRA guys have something better. I just copied their
picture.

You guys should try the CIRA folks (JOHN CRAVEN I believe) if you want
some info; at least extend them the courtesy before you condemn it. I bet
they'd get on the newsgroup if someone asked.

As for the satellite QSO, why is this a problem? For a 10:1 SNR or better
you don't need one heck of a good antenna on the earthside. This
calculation of system gain (hence bit rate) is a back of the envelope
calculation for the interested student--and a typical homework problem.
I'm not going to do this basic calculation on the newsgroup--you can find
it in oodles of places.( For example: how do SETI people figure out the
detectability of an ET beacon?) If asked, I will dig out Pierce's intro
telecom book and give you the page.

Again, this is not one of my antennas; I just feel that totally negative
attitudes on this newsgroup makes us look like asses to those who are
actually testing these antennae right now. Believe me, they are getting
attention and this antennae has a niche somewhere.

73
Chip N1IR


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:03:59 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!fc.hp.com!news
From: [e-mail] (Marc Illsley Clarke)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Who Makes the best Quad?
Date: 31 Oct 1996 22:51:38 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Fort Collins Site
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <55b3f2$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpfimic.fc.hp.com
In-reply-to: [e-mail]'s message of 31 Oct 1996 15:50:42 -0500

>>>>> "WayDaBe37" == WayDaBe37  <[e-mail]> writes:
In article <55b3f2$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (WayDaBe37) wr
ites:


    WayDaBe37> Hello To All, Would like input on who makes the best
    WayDaBe37> 3band 2element HF Quad. Appreciate your input. 73
    WayDaBe37> Tim,KC7QOM

Tim,

Please define "best" from your perspective.  Cheapest?  Lightest?
Highest forward gain?  Best front to back ratio?  Most exotic space
age materials?  Portable?  Foldable?  Smallest wind load?


--
Marc Illsley Clarke, [e-mail], KB0YDL, KB0YDL@N0MPI.#NECO.CO.USA.NOAM
4857 North Sheridan Avenue, Loveland, Colorado 80538-1767 USA
(Representing solely myself, I am emphatically NOT a representative of
any employer, club, group, church, league, organization, or government!)





From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:04:01 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!tandem!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 40 meter horizontal loop antenna
Date: Fri, 01 Nov 1996 00:24:09 GMT
Organization: Tandem Computers Inc., Cupertino, CA
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <55bg0t$[e-mail]>
References: <551898$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: clr6-6.mis.tandem.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

[e-mail] (K9SQG) wrote:

>Would like to hear of people's OWN experiences with a horizontal loop
>antenna for 40 meters for cases where the antenna is close to the earth,
>say 12-15 feet, and fed with open wire line.  Interest in knowing how
>effective it is for close in ragchewing NOT DX.  Also, interested in
>knowing what the best configuration is for using this antenna on 160 e.g.
>feed as a long wire, tie feeders together and use as a top loaded
>vertical, etc.  Finally, when feeding the antenna with open wire line, has
>anybody experienced unpleasant effects due to the length of the open wire
>feeders (e.g. high rf voltage in the shack)?

>Thanks...

>Evan

>[e-mail]
I have a loop up that is 25.5 ft on each side. It is fed with 450 ohm
open line in a fairly nontypical loop feed. I live on a mountain and
things are a bit screwy landwise so one side of the loop rests on the
peak of the house. The opposing side is maybe 10 or 12 feet off the
ground in the back of the house. First contact was Pennsylvania at 7pm
local in Seattle using 100 watts.

When you start doing nonstandard things, like close to earth,
buildings, etc., you should just put it up and see what happens. If
it's close to freespace then you can model and make predictions. The
rest of the time you have to commit and just do it.

Denny
kj7el



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:04:02 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail] (Mike Hughes)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: GE Mastr II info needed!!
Date: 1 Nov 96 00:31:08 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]

Hi all I just purchased some Mastr II's on High Band 154 MHZ. Would like
to make a repeater out of one of them. 146.235/835 MHZ Want some of them
for Voting receiver systems. And some for mobile use.
Does any one have any experience converting these radios? Can you give me
the conversion proceedure and what wires hook where, etc.? Also has any
one put a synthesizer on one before? Any help would be appreciated.

-.. .  .-- ..-. ..... .--.  .-.. --- .-- . .-.. .-..  .. -.
Mike Hughes - ETL List Manager - WF5P                211 Woodland Drive
Preacher                                            Lowell, IN 46356.
Mail to: [e-mail]                 [phone] or 696-3637 H
. -- .--. --- .-. - .- -. -  .. -. ..-. --- .-. -- .- - .. --- -.

To Receive the latest most upto date list of churches looking write to:
[e-mail]
To Receive list of Preachers looking write:
[e-mail]
Lists are updated as we receive new listings. Do your part to help!
 "Listen, an IQ can be a mixed blessing sometimes.  Some people want it
and
can't get it.  I got it and had to get rid of it.  Life's funny that way,
you know?" - Barney Fife
... .- -- - . ... -  --. .. ...- . -. .. -. --.- ..- .. .-. . .... . .-.
.
EOF




From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:04:04 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsbuffer.myriad.net!news.myriad.net!usenet
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Fwd: Tower Safety
Date: 1 Nov 1996 00:36:36 GMT
Organization: DigiPhone Corporation, Bryan/College Station Texas 409-693-8885
Lines: 58
Message-ID: <55bgmk$[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <55ak4a$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup511.myriad.net
X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2.5

In <55ak4a$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Michael Bruss) wr
ites:
>[e-mail] wrote:
>: [e-mail] (FORREST GEHRKE) wrote:

and drew an answer:

>In the overwhelming majority of cases, the worker would not be able to get
>far enough from the tower to deploy the chute effectively before the
>ground jumped up and bit him.  The worker
>would have to disengage the safety belt under very difficult
>circumstances and jump clear of the tower and guy wires.  Considering the
>cost of chutes, the enormous training and re-training costs, and the
>accident rate during training, it would be far better to spend more $ and
>effort in preventing collapses in the first place.
>
>Mike

I sponsored the Texas A&M Skydiving Club for a while years back.   Heck, I
don't even want to jump out of the things, but I had to wear a chute as the
pilot for safety sake...

Now considering what I know about the personality of skydivers, I bet even
THAT bunch wouldn't take on this deal!  I bet even THEY would have trouble
doing a cutaway come thruth or consequences time, let alone most riggers I've
met.

I think this is one sort of like the owner of the flight operation at which I
was Chief Instructor and Pilot for the Part 135 operation, taught me.  The
day he decided maybe I could fly this crew without burning up the engine or
warping the jugs coming down, like all the guys ere going, so he handed me
the chute and said figure out a SAFE way to do othis deal.

I looked at him and said, "Gee, I get to wear one of these things too!"

He said, "Yep, but I got news for you son, you'd damned sure better not
ever come in here dragging it behind you."

I did figure out a way to safely get the airplane down from a 12500 run
and hit the runway before the last guy out was on the ground and without
warping the jugs.   I just like tower work.

Think, plan ahead, make EVERY move as a planned move, don't leave
ANYTHING you can to chance.  If more than just you are involved, and make
sure you put on the show as a team with ONE guy doing the boss job...  There
are many ways to do a job, just do it right and never think that you can let
up your guard even for an instant.  Make sure everyone knows exactly what
to do and when....

I had a lot of fun teaching my son how to work steel and that thank you wasn't

just for being polite....

You know the drill...

//-----------------------------
Mike - W5WQN
[e-mail]
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:04:05 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!waikato!canterbury.ac.nz!southern.co.nz!news
From: [e-mail] (Gavin Melville)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: New 'N' Connectors OK?
Date: Fri, 01 Nov 1996 00:43:23 GMT
Organization: Southern InterNet Services
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <55bh38$[e-mail]>
References: <01bbc4e5$8f923820$aaecbdcc@rsmith> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: fred.cypher.co.nz
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82


>So I'm back to the old types.  Now, the problem with the old type is
>sometimes after I put them on the connector is "loose", that is I can
>hold the coax in one hand and the connnector in the other and twist,
>and the connector moves.  Connections like this "seem" to work OK
>until the connector falls off, but that usually is only a few hours
>later.  Sometimes, the connector is on nice and tight and stays that
>way.  My question is, what is it I did wrong with the ones that are
>loose?

There are N connectors for 9913 and N connectors for RG8/213 --- they
are quite different.
--
Gavin Melville,
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:04:06 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: [e-mail] (REGross1)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Bob Tail Curtain Matching Network Help????
Date: 31 Oct 1996 20:10:41 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 5
Sender: [e-mail]
Message-ID: <55bimh$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (REGross1)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I am building a Bob Tail Curtain for 17 meters and am having a problem in
determining the matching network to 50 ohm coax.  Does anyone know the
sizes needed for the coil and capacitor?
Robert E. Gross (KE3EM)
[e-mail]


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:04:06 1996
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 17:57:55 -0800
From: Harbin Osteen <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win16; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
To: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
References: <[e-mail]> <5565hp$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.104.240.202
Lines: 15
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.stealth.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!wizard.pn.com!brighton.openmarket.com!decwrl!pagesat.net!mothra.westworld.com!207.104.240.202

>
> I see many posts "sizeable, substancial....GP for a .5wl antenna.
>
> You are wrong . it needs a .5 wl radial system, not a substancial...
> You dont know what you're talking about on half waves.
>
> ______End of text  from altavoz___________
Hi altavoz:
I am going to get a 5/8 MaCo antenna for my C.B. (11 meters?).
I got in on the thread late, but are you saying that ground
raidials have to only be equal to 1/2 wave in length to get
a dB gain? The MaCo does not come with raidials, so will it
work with raidals without messing up the SWR? I think a ground
plane will help any vertical antenna, but I'm not shure.
SeeYaa:) Harbin


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:04:07 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!newshost.cyberramp.net!usenet
From: johnf <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: ham radio page
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 18:51:32 -0800
Organization: CyberRamp.net, Dallas, TX [phone]/[phone] for info
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dal-tsa3-p1-14.cyberramp.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; U)

http://www.why.net/users/3051


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:04:08 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mr.net!winternet.com!news
From: SHolisky <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Fwd: Tower Safety
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 22:59:34 -0400
Organization: StarNet Communications, Inc
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <55ak4a$[e-mail]> <55bgmk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-67-117.dialup.winternet.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Macintosh; I; 68K)

Chutes! I don't think so.

Having worked with a few of the best over the years, I can say
that the attitude is that "the danger is known". Most riggers
are "seasoned" pro's. Those that come to work "green" usually
get good quick or get out.

Despite all, accidents happen. ( They understand this best.)

The lesson is to be humble and ask youself if you really
"know" what you're doing, before putting your life on the
line.

Regards


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:04:09 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!enews.sgi.com!decwrl!tribune.usask.ca!rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!news.bc.net!nntp.mbnet.mb.ca!news
From: Bill Evans <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Swan Model 45 Multiband Mobile
Date: 1 Nov 1996 03:03:18 GMT
Organization: MBnet - Manitoba's Connection To The Internet
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <55bp9m$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.112.178.47

I have a twenty year old Swan Model 45 mobile antenna
that is in good shape physically, has been lightly used, but
is exhibiting strange electrical problems.

The 45 is a multiband configuration using a slider inside
a large centre loading coil.  There are stops on the slider for 10,
15, 20 and 40m, with five additional stops for various frequencies
on 75m.  A stinger is used to achieve resonance on the
lowest 75m frequency, with everything else supposed to
fit in place.

With the stinger fully collapsed, the resonant frequencies on 10
through 15m are all out of band on the high side - as
one might expect.  However, while I have DC continuity
through to the stinger, extending it provides almost no
change in resonant frequency.  Moreover, the resonant
frequencies for all of the 75m taps are lower in frequency
- in direct opposition to the other bands.

Does anyone have any experience with this antenna that might
explain my problems?

Bill Evans  VE4UD
[e-mail]
winnipeg, MB


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:04:10 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!cdc2.cdc.net!news.texas.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!qualcomm.com!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news1.ucsd.edu!news-mail-gateway
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: FW: KOMPEX PR2000-Help needed
Date: 1 Nov 96 03:16:33 GMT
Organization: ucsd usenet gateway
Lines: 13
Sender: Robert Lenicek <[e-mail]>
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.ucsd.edu
Originator: [e-mail]


Your address from -whowhere/hams-.Hi there, I am in urgent need of a manual
and repairshop or dealer, in fact anybody who can assist with the repair and

programming of a KOMPEX PR2000 70cm handheld transceiver. Anywhere in the
USA but preferably somewhere in LA area. If you can assist or know anyone
who knows about this rig please let me know and pass my request on. Many
thanks,73's - de ZS6BZW, Robert Lenicek, [e-mail]







From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:04:11 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!panix!feed1.news.erols.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 19:20:56 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.147.234.249
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

[e-mail] wrote:
>
> My thoughts here are that everything in antennas is a compromise.  A 1/4 wav
e
> vertical can be hooked directly to 50 ohm coax, with radials bent down 45
> degrees, without a matching device.  A 5/8 wave will give you more gain than
> a 1/4 wave (due to the *squashed* radiation pattern), but requires a matchin
g
> device.  A 1/2 wave vertical needs a more complex matching device, but does
> not require radials, which makes it a good choice for HT operations.
>
> Bob
> KD8WU

altavoz: You're wrong , 1/2 wl ant's require 1/2 wl radials,
but at 2000 ohms , it makes no sense and 5/8 wl has more gain
anyway. The 5/8 wl vert compared to 1/4 wl is not squashed, it's
concentrated on the horizon , and the 1/4 wl is mostly up at
45 degrees ( great for talking to airplanes) . I can bent the
coil for a 5/8 wl in 10 seconds of no. 12 cu wire .
  If all the books agreed , we'd have no problem , but some
of the best books have it wrong , and that means for lazy people
who beleive the most expensive book is right, this is the truth.
  We've known for a long time that the ARRL words things so poorly
especially antennas, that it causes a lot of fighting .
   Read it's explanation on traps ! ha ha ha .....
They dont even touch on what happens if the element above the
trap is 1/2 wl !!!  A trap is an electrical short circuit to a 1/2
wl element above it !!
  Paul H. Lee "Amatuer Rad' vert' antenna HB"   page 84 .
"...if he is content to throw away 40 to 80% of his radiated
power in earth losses.." (1/2 wl w/o radials)


______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:04:13 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 19:24:28 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.147.234.249
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

JAMES MCEWEN wrote:
>
>      ***********************************************************
>
>      The Wiz of altaOZ wrote:
>      altavoz: We dropped the use of the word RESONANT years ago.
>      It's meaningless. We use Q . Q is rate of change of reactance
>      over frequency .
>
>      ***********************************************************
>
>
>      Wiz, I just don't understand what you said here.
>
>      For instance:  In a series RLC circuit
>
>                 XsubL = 2Pi_f_L  so by your statement
>
>                  Q  =  dt(2Pi_f_L)/f
>
>
>                     since 2Pi & L are constant
>                     they can come outside the function
>
>
>                  Q  = 2PiL dt(f)/f  = 2PiL (1) = a constant
>
>                  Are you saying that Q = 2PiL  ?
>
>
>       I think by the definition of Q, it is a meaningful number only
>      at the resonant frequency.  In a series RLC circuit Q is defined
>      as:
>
>                Q = (2Pi_f-sub-r_L)/R where f-sub-r is the resonant
>      frequency and R is the series resistance of the circuit.
>
>
>      So going back to your original statement quoted at the top of
>      this posting, what were you trying to explain?
>
>      Jim KA6TPR


altavoz DUH , RATE OF CHANGE OF REACTANCE OVER FREQ ( this is a
repeat for those who cant read)

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:04:14 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!panix!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 19:28:25 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
         <555jar$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.147.234.249
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Mandy Wright wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, altavoz
> <[e-mail]> writes
> >W8JI Tom wrote:
> >>
> >> In article <[e-mail]>, altavoz
> >> <[e-mail]> writes:
> >>
> >> >altavoz: I know what im talking about , so i made the absolute
> >> >statement , and i stand by it . Between .25w and .5w you'll need
> >> >a cap to tune and caps are expensive , so why not not just jump
> >> >to .6w and a coil does it and the 2nd lobe isnt significant.
> >> >  What you're not looking at is the pattern (gain). .25w
> >> >pattern is trash.
> >>
> >> Actually the minor lobe of a 5/8 wl is not insignificant, that's why most
> >> broadcast stations abandoned them by the 30's. On sky wave, the minor lob
e
> >> arrives back on earth and interferes with the desired signal from the mai
n
> >> lobe, and gives rise to severe fading.

altavoz : It does not ( minor lobe). They were required by FCC to
"gaurd " , and they had to have antennas that were very complex.

> >> A 5/8 wl antenna ONLY acheives its' gain when over a very very large
> >> groundplane, several wavelengths of near perfect ground. Without the larg
e
> >> perfectly reflecting ground, the 5/8 wl has about the same or slightly
> >> LESS gain than a 1/2 wl with no reflecting ground.
> >>
> >> Any slight matching advantage in matching is offset by these
> >> disadvantages.
> >>
> >> 73 Tom
> >altavoz: Read Paul H. Lee page 84 "Am' Rad' Vert' Ant' HB"
As he proves you must have a counterpoise for a 1/2w ant.
A J POLE DOESNT WORK ! IT HAS POOR LOW ANGLE RADIATION .
He says " Actualy the 5/8w vert is better than the 1/2
vert from the standpoints of low angle radiation and feedpoint
impedance.." , he's talking about HF 5/8 wl .


______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:04:16 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.clark.net!mr.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 20:05:04 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 115
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <55arq1$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.147.234.249
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Roy Lewallen wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>,
>    [e-mail] (Joel Govostes) wrote:
> >Here's an antenna question that I've never found an explanation for --
> >
> >For mobile or fixed station use, a typical vertical antenna is 1/4 wave
> >and fed with low-impedance coaxial cable.  The ground is provided by earth
> >ground, automobile body, or a set of "ground plane" elements.  Okay.
> >
> >This type of antenna matches 50-ohm coax and transmitter output circuits
> well.
> >
> >So, who came up with the oddball figure of 5/8 wave for vertical antennas,
> >and why?
> >
> >I know that the radiation pattern shape is somewhat "squashed" on the 5/8
> >wave, and that it provides some gain over the 1/4 wave.  But 5/8
> >wavelength doesn't match 50 ohm coax feed, and so usually it is fed on a
> >loading-coil tap at the base of the vertical.


altavoz: WHY SO INTIMIDATED ON ANT' MATCHING ? A SINGLE COIL !!

> >I'm wondering what is so special about the 5/8 wave antenna length; why
> >not just a 1/2 wave (4/8 wave)?  Could 1/2 wave vertical be fed in a
> >similar way, and would it also provide significant gain over the 1/4
> >wave?  Why not just go to 6/8-wave size, as that would match coax feed as
> >3/4 wave (odd multiple of 1/4 wave ~ approx. 50 ohms.)          Thanks


altavoz: main lobe points up, poor gain ! ( 6/8 wl )
 Cant feed a 1/2 wl .

> Imagine putting a vertical on a perfect ground plane, flat and infinite in
> extent. Start with a very short vertical, just a small fraction of a
> wavelength high, and look at the radiation pattern. From an infinitesimal
> height to a height of 1/4 wavelength, the pattern and gain change very
> little. (There's less than 0.5 dB change in gain, and a correspondingly
> small change in pattern shape. Remember we're neglecting losses here.) The
> pattern is just 1/2 that of a dipole of twice the length in free space, the
> familiar donut pattern. As the height of the vertical increases from 1/4 to
> 1/2 wavelength, the donut flattens, increasing the gain at the horizon as
> it decreases at higher angles. The gain of a 1/2 wavelength vertical over
> a perfect ground is about 2 dB greater than a 1/4 wave vertical. As the
> antenna increases in height above 1/2 wavelength, a lobe appears at 60
> degrees above the horizon. Just above 1/2 wavelength, it's still small and
> doesn't represent much of the antenna's total energy output, but grows as
> the height increases.

alatvoz:Why would you want a > 5/8 wl ? And why are you so affraid of
radials ? ( perfectly conducting ground )

> The horizon lobe continues to get narrower and
> stronger as the antenna lengthens above 1/2 wavelength, until it reaches
> about 5/8 wavelength. At this point, the gain at the horizon is about 3 dB
> greater than a 1/4 wavelength vertical. The 60-degree lobe is significant
> at this point, which is why the 5/8 wave antenna isn't used by
> broadcasters. The signal from the upper lobe can arrive at a listening
> station via skywave, cancelling the desired groundwave signal if the two
> arrive out of phase.

altavoz: No , they dont use 5/8 wl because its illegal. They're required
by FCC to not transmit outside of a limited area. Those SWL stations
that are allowed do use 5/8 wl .  And i would use 3 , 5/8 wl phased .

  There is no higher gain for skip than a 5/8 wl ant , a 1/2 wl above
ground .

> If the vertical height is increased beyond about 5/8 wavelength, the
> horizon lobe decreases as the 60 degree lobe increases, so the gain at the
> horizon is maximum at a height of about 5/8 wavelength -- about 3 dB
> greater than a 1/4 wavelength vertical. This is why the "magic" length.
>
> This analysis was done with a perfect ground which real ground never is. At
> HF, you'll probably see less than 3 dB gain (relative to a 1/4 wave
> vertical) from a 5/8 wave radiatior. This is because the ground absorbs
> low-angle reflections from vertically polarized antennas. Since a larger
> fraction of the radiation from the 5/8 wave vertical is at very low angles,
> a larger fraction of it is absorbed.

altavoz: So we should not try for low angle , we should try for high
angle so it doesn't skip !!!!  NOT !  YOU NEED 3 to 10 DEGREES TO SKIP
AT THE 2000 mile 1st hop.

> The actual gain difference is a
> function of the ground conductivity, dielectric constant, and frequency.
> A 1/4 wave vertical will actually have more gain at some low angles than a
> 5/8 wave for some ranges of ground characteristics and frequency.

altavoz: WRONG .When you use radials and proper ht, you're arguement dies.


> You can see this for yourself with any of the modeling programs, including
> the ELNEC demo available from ftp.teleport.com/pub/vendors/w7el as
> ELNECDEM.EXE. ("Running" it expands it into several files, including a
> READ.ME file.) I believe it's also available via WWW.

altavoz Modeling progs dont work for HF.

> I haven't had a chance to model 5/8 wave antennas over abbreviated ground
> planes (such as a car top), but think there's reason to believe that the 3
> dB gain advantage may not be realized when the antennas are mounted on an
> abbreviated ground plane. There was an interesting paper on this topic
> titled "The 5/8-Wavelength Antenna Mystique", by Donald K. Reynolds, K7DBA,
> in the ARRL Antenna Compendium, Vol. 1.
>
> Roy Lewallen, W7EL

altavoz: 5/8 wl ant's need a full 5/8 wl radial system . at 90 deg'
the main lobe is pushed up too high . Thats why for the last 20 years
the commercial makers have made them with 180 deg' radials.


______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:04:17 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!newsgate.compuserve.com!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 20:09:02 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <55861u$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <559s28$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.147.234.249
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

[e-mail] wrote:
>
> In <[e-mail]>, altavoz <[e-mail]> writ
es:
> >Marc Illsley Clarke wrote:
>
> >Capacitors are not used to tune most antennas cause they
> >cost much more $, cant be trimmed, and where they're used
> >there is less gain ( .25 to .5 wl), Break easier, dont
> >stand up to wx.....
>
> Absolutely false.  I've used small chunks of coax cable as gamma match
> capacitors in arrays for YEARS at a time and they cost next to nothing, are
> so simple to trim it is a no-brainer, have virtually no effect on gain, NEVE
R
> break and hang out in total exposure to the weather for YEARS unattended!
>
> Haven't you ever used a small chunk of coax for a capacitor??????
>
> It's stupidly simple, works wonderfully, even out in the weather for YEARS
> and costs only pennies to use!   Just tie the center to one end and the shie
ld
> to another and push the shield around on the outside in the near-values to
> trim it.  You final the trim with a pair of dikes and tape it.
>
> Presto..   Instant success, but not unless you have played with stuff like
> this for real and need to accomplish things cheaply....
>
> Try it; you'll like it!
>
>
> Mike - W5WQN




altavoz: Sure thats why all commercial makers use stubs . NOT !!
An open stub ( Xc) is not nearly as high Q as a shorted stub ( XL)
And i dont need to you why.

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:04:18 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.webspan.net!ix.netcom.com!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: WHY antennas of "5/8" wavelength?
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 20:09:53 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <55b1ha$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.147.234.249
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

W8JI Tom wrote:
>
> In article <[e-mail]>, altavoz
> <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> >altavoz: I am contributing , but assholes like you , lose arguments
> >and throw a tantrum .
>
> There is no need for this, unless you are two years old. Atavoz, please
> talk nicer.
>
> All that does is make you look dumb.
>
> 73 Tom


altavoz: Then act nicer .


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:04:19 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!nic.mtl.hookup.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!news.total.net!news
From: [e-mail] (H. Caron)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: Re: Newbie question: Broadband Loop?
Date: Fri, 01 Nov 1996 04:13:08 GMT
Organization: Infobahn Online Services, Montreal, CANADA [phone]
Lines: 65
Message-ID: <55cdn7$[e-mail]>
References: <54gfj1$[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup72.infobahnos.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news1.epix.net rec.radio.amateur.antenna:30894 rec.radio.shortwave:87756

[e-mail] (Eric F. Richards) wrote:

>Greetings, all...

>I live in an apartment complex in which I cannot set up any reasonable
>sized outdoor antenna -- even an invisible magnet wire random antenna.
>This apartment complex is also very noisy -- I have trouble picking
>up all but the very strongest HF signals.  Noise is around S7-8 with 18dB
>attenuation switched in!

That's a lot of noise. By the description you give of your living
quarter, I'm leed to think that you live in a Faraday cage, e.i.
modern building with lots of metal sidings, reinforced concrete, walls
floors and ceilings, electrical wiring everywhere. Not very good to
let rf in and at the same time very thight to any internal e.m. noise.
Micro-wave oven, light dimmers, fluorescents, variable intensity
halogen lamps, computers, hair dryers... the work. Hum...

His that the case?

Do you have any of those in your own appt.?

What type of receiver have you got. Portable, table-top?
What make?

Have you operate it at other locations, environment?  At home, at a
friend's place ? If you did, was the reception ' normal ' ?

Have you tried to bring it on the balcony and operate it from there,
to check if it was still noisy? If not, may be you should give it a
try.

>I do have a balcony which might be suitable for a large loop antenna, say
>18 ft by 8 ft.  Most of what I've read here and elsewhere describes tuned
>loops -- what about broadband loops?  Would two or three turns of magnet
>wire along the balcony be useful from 3-30 MHz?  If not, what low-noise
>options designs exist that are suitable?  I've tried end-fed into a hi-Z
>input and a dipole (more like an inverted "U") fed by RG-58 without luck.

What's the balcony general orientation, N,S,E,W ?

I presume those ant. where on the balcony and you brought the RG-58
through the window or the door. Were you connect to any type of
ground? (water pipe, building electrical system ground etc.).

>This antenna will be used for reception only.

If you could supply this ng with these infos, you could problably get
some valuable help.

H.C.





>Thanks much,

>Eric F. Richards
>[e-mail]

Eric,





From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:04:20 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: DESPARATE NEED , HELP
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 20:13:31 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.147.234.249
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

Some have asked " Where do i buy
Paul H. Lee "Amatuer Radio Vertical antenna Handbook "

Can anyone help them out please.

It's the best antenna ever written for $10 ( hell ,
even at $50 , it would be the best).
  If you would rather not see your beloved ARRL antenna
book put to shame , dont buy Pauls book ( he disagrees with
them !!).

______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:04:21 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.icix.net!news.gate.net!nntp.seflin.lib.fl.us!p034904b
From: [e-mail] (Ed Howard)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: Scanner Ant?
Date: 1 Nov 1996 04:20:51 GMT
Organization: SEFLIN Free-Net - Palm Beach
Lines: 23
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <55btr3$[e-mail]>
References: <54qbkk$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pbfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

 David M Schertzer ([e-mail]) wrote:
: My buddy has a NEW scanner and little space to install
: an external antenna. Can't mount it due to housing regulation.
: We can use inside the garage or attic..Will a long-wire work?
: Any plans avail to build such a device? Plse reply below ...
: Thanks alot...............dave

: Oak Harbor, WA   USA
: Ham Radio - VE7-LFA/W7
: [e-mail]

Use the atic. I have all my VHF/UHF antennae in the atic and they work
great. I don't think a long wire will work too good for a scanner but let
us know what frequencies you are listening to and then you will get
suggestions. Ground planes work good unless you are far from what you
want to hear.

73  de  Ed  KE4BMR

From the great town of Haverhill, Florida
Ed Howard
[e-mail]



From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:04:22 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.logical.net!news
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: altavoz
Date: Fri, 01 Nov 1996 04:34:25 GMT
Organization:
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup082.qnsbny1.capital.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.1/32.230

As long as this guy keeps getting responses he'll keep up the
nonsense. That's what he wants. Keep everybody stirred up and roaring.
He's getting his kicks. You'll notice he doesn't give out a call-sign.
73,
Butch N2YMJ


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:04:23 1996
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: altavoz <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Subject: Re: 5/8's antennas & coax matching sections
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 20:43:06 -0800
Organization: worldnet.att.net
Lines: 85
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.147.234.249
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (Win16; I)

JAMES MCEWEN wrote:
>
>      Why don't we combine these threads?
>
>      The Wiz of AltavOZ is correct(slightly) because a 1/4 *L*
>      (wavelength) SHORTED section has the same input impedance as an
>      OPEN 1/2 *L* section.  No one has defined what kind of section
>      they are talking about.(open or shorted)

altavoz: The shorted 1/4 wl will have higher Z than open 1/2 wl
  cause of free space being 377 ohms.

>      The Wiz is also correct (slightly) because the physical length of
>      antennas are less then the electrical length, because of end
>      effects and wire diameter. But if I understand his reference,
>      this isn't what he is talking about.  He is referring to short
>      antennas with base loading and tapped coils for matching, as is
>      done in many mobile installations.  This isn't what most of the
>      others are discussing.
>      The Wiz was also correct in his understanding of what a conjugate
>      match is and what a 1/2 *L* section will do but again that wasn't
>      the question that Cecil, W6RCA, was answering, or what he was
>      talking about.
>      So Wiz, you are correct in what you say, but thats not what the
>      rest of us are talking about.
>
>      The 5/8 *L* has more gain then the 1/4 *L* antenna IF it has a
>      large ground screen (like 5/8-1/2 *L*), this is mostly in lower
>      angle radiation.  If the ground screen is <= 1/4 *L*, then it
>      develops high angle lobes, reducing the power in the lower lobes
>      and has a pattern that may be less desirable then a 1/4 *L*
>      ground plane.

altavoz: WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO PUT A 1/4 WL SCREEN UNDER A 5/8 WL ANT' ?


>      It also requires a matching network to operate with
>      coaxial cable, which a 1/4 *L* ground plane antenna does not.
>      Sorry Wiz, you are just incorrect in your statement that all 1/4
>      *L* antennas need at matching network, or that they are tuned by
>      a coil.

altavoz: That single coil really intimidates you , doesnt it .


>      Once again you people keep talking apples and oranges.  A point
>      source has the same radiating ability as a 1/4 *L* or 5/8 *L*
>      antenna, but it distributes the power in a sphere. 50 watts into
>      the air is 50 watts, how is  distributed is what makes a
>      difference.
>
>      Again I have to disagree with the Wiz, in that a J-pole does
>      work. Maybe not at an optimum point for low angle radiation, or
>      at an optimum point for a horizontal pattern, but it has certain
>      factors that make it much more convenient then a 5/8 *L*, size
>      being one of them.  If you are trying to contact an airplane at
>      an elevation of 45 degrees then an antenna with a low angle of
>      radiation is a pretty poor performer.  If it is a repeater on a
>      mountain peak, you may have the same problems.

altavoz: Your repeaters are at 30 degrees ???!!!!!
 A 5/8 wl vert' has 80% of its gain at 20 degrees , so its better
than a 1/4 wwl ant for mtn top repeaters !! From now on lets call
1/4 wl ant's "AIRPLANE ANTENNAS "  ha ha ha ha


>      So I'll make a challenge.  Instead of personally attacking
>      someone, ask what they mean.  When you make a statement, state
>      what your boundary conditions are, anything I read in this
>      newsgroup that has the words ALWAYS and NEVER in it make me
>      suspect the experience and maturity of the author.
>
>      Jim KA6TPR
>

altavoz: Boundry conditions are necessary when people dont want
to understand ( when they want you to be wrong) . Among open
minded , skilled people , assumptions are made . If you read
Paul H Lee , you'll change some of your ideas on antennas ( and
he quotes JASIK,BROWN ).  Paul and I are in a group that is not
affraid to go against the majority .  And when i'm proven right ?
NOTHING !


______End of text  from altavoz___________


From [e-mail] Thu Nov 07 21:04:24 1996
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Path: news1.epix.net!news4.epix.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!netcom.com!veltman
From: [e-mail] (paul Veltman)
Subject: RE: Rhombics
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 1996 04:58:25 GMT
Lines: 22
Sender: [e-mail]

Well gang, remember that Don Wallace, W6AM bought his site from Federal
Telegraph (I think in the 30's or maybe just after WW2).  The site out on
Palo Verde Penninsula didn't go for a megabuck per quarter acre back
then like it does now.

And the antennas were already on the site, so his construction costs were
almost zero.  And all that yummy salt water around him.  Who knows what he
would have put up there if he just had bare land.

Now to the poster who said that there were no voltage and current
maximums on rhombics, this interests me.  Can you please elaborate
further?  I would like to know.

And as far as the 'hate mail' is concerned, just ignore these constipated
sourpusses.  They'll eventually get tired and go over to
rec.radio.lid.

Keep smiling.  It'll make everyone wonder what you've been up to.

73

Paul WA6OKQ