On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 20:43:41 GMT, Walter Maxwell wrote:

On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 10:55:11 -0500, Cecil Moore wrote:

H. Adam Stevens, NQ5H wrote:
but any increase in the 1.5:1 SWR bandwidth is due to loss as Walt proved
decades ago.

If you want a really broad-banded Bazooka, use RG-174. :-)
Advantages: light weight for easy back-packing, no tuner
required, inexpensive coax, ... Hey, maybe I should keep
it secret until I market it for $100.
Egad, Cecil! It's evident I wasn't too bright years ago when I showed why the
bazooka gets its meager increase in BW from resistive loss, not reactance
cancellation. My scamming genes hadn't developed to the point where I even
thought of marketing it instead of panning it. As you said, Cecil, with the
higher loss available using RG-174 vs RG-17, think of how rich we could have
become if we'd let the morons continue to believe what a great antenna it is,
and sold em with 174.

Walt, W2DU

There's a Double Bazooka currently on eBay for the "Buy it Now" price
of only $60.

Part of the sales pitch is:

"The Double Bazooka antenna was designed and developed by the M.I.T
staff in the 1940's as a radar recieving antenna. Its design was
modified for the hf amateur radio bands."

There's one born every minute...

bob
k5qwg