Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Carolina Windom without a balun: go figure
Owen Duffy wrote:
Roy Lewallen wrote in treetonline: When trying to understand off center fed antennas, it's important to realize a few key facts: ... Yes, I thing you are quite correct Roy. The advertising hype that goes along with many of these commercially popularised antennas gives the impression that deployment of multi-band wire antennas for the lower HF bands is a very standardised thing, a no- brainer. One buys the product, installs it in their own environment in their own way, and it just "works" out of the box... whatever "works" means. The real world doesn't work that simply. But to a buyer with faith in the promotional claims, they can buy a lot of satisfaction for only $69.99 or whatever, and not have any untidy left over materials to clutter up their home, or residual technical issues to clutter up their mind. Today, the growth opportunity in the US is selling attic antennas for low HF bands to new hams. Not as popular here because restrictive covenants on residential properties aren't as common. But, hey, a simple wire antenna with published performance figures from 160m to 2m is attractive to *our* new six hour hams. Which antenna is that? The W5GI Mystery Antenna, you know, the one "that performs exceptionally well even though it confounds antenna modeling software". With all respect, Owen - a Ham can be just as ignorant if they tested in the days when we had to mine and smelt our own copper for antennas. There is plenty of ignorance to go around. Before I go too much further, Hams should build their own wire antennas. No excuses. The interesting thing is that most of these novel antennas work to some extent. I know a fellow in PA who was excited that he could work Maine on 40 meters with a really bad antenna setup. He just didn't know what to expect. (from where I'm at, 100 watts and a modest dipole should just about ruin an S-meter between those two places) That is how antenna BS starts. This guy would think that a poor antenna is great because it performs better than his awful antenna.. 8^) I won't come out and condemn things like OCF dipoles though, because they are an interesting and cool novelty, and by gosh, I had fun building, testing, and using mine. I learned a lot. Used one during Field day, and ran and held frequencies at 100 watts on 80 meters. Totally subjective of course, but low power stations usually don't do that. One of the things I learned was that it is a real compromise. Higher band performance wasn't so hot. But I'm a lot better off having built it, and finding out it's capabilities and shortcomings, than just believing that it is a bad antenna because I've been told it was so. I know exactly what the antenna is like, and it only took me a few hours of work, and a couple months of testing to find out. I note this mainly because I am one of the unwashed new Hams - and we aren't all as you describe. - 73 de Mike N3LI - |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Carolina Windom without a balun: go figure
Ralph Mowery wrote:
"Michael Coslo" wrote in message ... Before I go too much further, Hams should build their own wire antennas. No excuses. For some hams, it is cheeper to just buy the wire antennas. By the time you go to the store or order some wire, get the coax, get the insulators, get one or two coax connectors, and maybe a balun , it may be cheeper to just get all in one place for one price. Side note: I was at a Ham supply store this past year, and I was looking for some window line. They had a dipole antenna that included window line for about half the price of the same amount of window line by itself. That's probably the only good excuse IMO to buy a pre-made wire antenna. But I don't build my own antennas to save money. I'm trying to learn something. Can I design and cut and install the antenna, and does it perform as my design says it does? I do build all my wire antennas because I can get the wire for free and found some insulators for nothing. If building trap dioples or other special wire antenas, the parts issue is even greater. Never built a trap dipole. I'm going to have to try it some day. I guess the major advantage will be that it won't be so lobey as a longer wire tuned for the higher frequency. But hey, the experimentation is the fun. I'm not here to convince anyone that my antenna is bigger than theirs! ;^) he he. I have an OCF antenna at 45 feet that I use for 80 and 40 meters. It works much beter than an 80 meter dipole antenna at 25 feet usually. They are at right angles to each other. I do have a beam for other bands so do not care how it works on the higher bands. It does seem to have a larger bandwidth than the regular dipole on 80 meters. Yeah, I did okay on 80 and 40 too. That was my thing with the OCF. It just seemed to be at best a 2 band antenna, IIRC, the bandwidth was a little bigger on my OCF. All antennas are a compromise of some sort, and the OCF is within the acceptable range. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Carolina Windom without a balun: go figure
"Michael Coslo" wrote in message ... Before I go too much further, Hams should build their own wire antennas. No excuses. For some hams, it is cheeper to just buy the wire antennas. By the time you go to the store or order some wire, get the coax, get the insulators, get one or two coax connectors, and maybe a balun , it may be cheeper to just get all in one place for one price. I do build all my wire antennas because I can get the wire for free and found some insulators for nothing. If building trap dioples or other special wire antenas, the parts issue is even greater. I have an OCF antenna at 45 feet that I use for 80 and 40 meters. It works much beter than an 80 meter dipole antenna at 25 feet usually. They are at right angles to each other. I do have a beam for other bands so do not care how it works on the higher bands. It does seem to have a larger bandwidth than the regular dipole on 80 meters. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Carolina Windom without a balun: go figure
Michael Coslo wrote in
: With all respect, Owen - a Ham can be just as ignorant if they tested in the days when we had to mine and smelt our own copper for antennas. Mike, it is not about ignorance or how we were tested. We all start from a base of no knowledge. The test doesn't make a ham, it is the enquiring interest that makes us hams. We are promoting ham radio to a different population, one that is more excited by the box with lights and knobs, than an enquiring interest and understanding of how it works. Then add the economic factors that it is cheaper to buy an antenna complete than to buy the ladder line it contains... and people have a economic rationale for passing up the opportunity to do, to discover, to learn. The getting of knowledge often has monetary cost... the question individuals need to ask is are they worth the investment in themselves. The point about *our* new (VK) hams is that with just six hours investment in the hobby, they aren't well equipped to see through outragous claims of some antenna manufacturers. My perception is that there are many more US sourced wire antennas of the magic kind appearing on the bands here in VK since the introduction of our Foundation Licence. Owen |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Carolina Windom revisited: 4 to 1 balun does nothing to choke RF? | Antenna | |||
Carolina Windom using 300 ohm ladderline | Antenna | |||
FS: Carolina Windom 75 Meter Ant | Swap | |||
FA: Carolina Windom 160M | Swap | |||
Carolina Windom | Antenna |