Reg Edwards wrote:
Now, Cecil, you understand this as well as I do. Cease pulling my leg. So
don't expect me to waste any more of my time discussing it. ;o)

Yuri didn't agree with the following assertion by an antenna guru:

"If you look at HOW an inductor works, the current flowing in one
terminal ALWAYS equals the current flowing out the other terminal."

Because Yuri didn't agree with that assertion, he was accused of
being lower than the deepest layer of whale sh*t in the deepest
part of the ocean. Can you blame him for reacting?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Yuri Blanarovich wrote:
1. Placement of the loading coil can drastically affect that. (Base loaded
vs.
Top Hat loaded)

BTW, Yuri, you and others may not be aware that my junk box top-loaded
mobile antenna equaled the best-of-the-best in one of the antenna
shoot-outs. The loading coil was just some cheap 1.75" dia coil stock
from my junk box. It wasn't anything like a bugcatcher and it cost
virtually nothing.


This is what W9UCW measurerd, that Q of the coil did not contribute
significantly to performance. If wire is reasonable gauge to carry the current
to minimize the ohmic loses, then it was very close with that super-duper Hi-Q
coil.

The bottom section was a 108" conductor curving toward the coil which was
***HORIZONTAL***. Yes, the coil was horizontal as was the top hat to which
it was attached. If I had known it was going to do that well, I could have
won by making the top hat a little bigger. Here is an ASCII diagram of that
antenna:
loading coil
- ////////////--Capacitive top hat
/
/
/
/
| Pickup
|
|
|
|
FP
--------GND------------------------------------------------------
So I discovered by accident what is being discussed now. Seems obvious that
the coil could be shorted and the top hat disconnected for higher
frequencies.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



That is close to my "secret" K3BU 160m antenna that runs circles around the
"classic" whip. I used 80m regular Hustler coil. From the point where set screw
tightens the whip I run about 13 ft of wire, top loading to small mast on the
front bumper. By sliding that end up and down I managed to tune the antenna
within the bottom end of 160. It also gave me some horizontal component for the
NVIS.
The net result was that even with "lousy" Hustler 80m coil, I managed to
increase the high current carrying portion of radiator, coil didn't have to be
that large, top loading wire also served as a guy. I didn't use real hat, just
wire. Mast is mounted on the fender of 72 Buick LeSabre.
The flat earth society will argue that it can be only 0.1 dB improvement, but I
saw on average about 7 S-units boost. K5NA once travelled with regular 160m
mobile during the contest, didn't make single QSO. With my ugly thing I worked
stations from W6 through South America to Eu.
Another egg in the face Richard and his ridiculing.

73 Yuri

The mobile contacts are impressive,Was the European contacts audio or C.W.,
100 watts? Was you on a beach or something?

Art


"Yuri Blanarovich" wrote in message
...

Yuri Blanarovich wrote:
1. Placement of the loading coil can drastically affect that. (Base
loaded
vs.
Top Hat loaded)

BTW, Yuri, you and others may not be aware that my junk box top-loaded
mobile antenna equaled the best-of-the-best in one of the antenna
shoot-outs. The loading coil was just some cheap 1.75" dia coil stock
from my junk box. It wasn't anything like a bugcatcher and it cost
virtually nothing.


This is what W9UCW measurerd, that Q of the coil did not contribute
significantly to performance. If wire is reasonable gauge to carry the
current
to minimize the ohmic loses, then it was very close with that super-duper
Hi-Q
coil.

The bottom section was a 108" conductor curving toward the coil which was
***HORIZONTAL***. Yes, the coil was horizontal as was the top hat to
which
it was attached. If I had known it was going to do that well, I could
have
won by making the top hat a little bigger. Here is an ASCII diagram of
that
antenna:
loading coil
- ////////////--Capacitive top hat
/
/
/
/
| Pickup
|
|
|
|
FP
--------GND------------------------------------------------------
So I discovered by accident what is being discussed now. Seems obvious
that
the coil could be shorted and the top hat disconnected for higher
frequencies.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



That is close to my "secret" K3BU 160m antenna that runs circles around
the
"classic" whip. I used 80m regular Hustler coil. From the point where set
screw
tightens the whip I run about 13 ft of wire, top loading to small mast on
the
front bumper. By sliding that end up and down I managed to tune the
antenna
within the bottom end of 160. It also gave me some horizontal component
for the
NVIS.
The net result was that even with "lousy" Hustler 80m coil, I managed to
increase the high current carrying portion of radiator, coil didn't have
to be
that large, top loading wire also served as a guy. I didn't use real hat,
just
wire. Mast is mounted on the fender of 72 Buick LeSabre.
The flat earth society will argue that it can be only 0.1 dB improvement,
but I
saw on average about 7 S-units boost. K5NA once travelled with regular
160m
mobile during the contest, didn't make single QSO. With my ugly thing I
worked
stations from W6 through South America to Eu.
Another egg in the face Richard and his ridiculing.

73 Yuri

The mobile contacts are impressive,Was the European contacts audio or C.W.,
100 watts? Was you on a beach or something?

Art


They was SSB and CW, some was 100W some was 500W, some was from my driveway,
some was while driving to VE1ZZ place. When close to the ocean or going over
the bridges the signals would jump 10 - 15 dB. Some would say it can't be, but
I say it woz!

73 Yuri, K3BU/m, VE3BMV/m, VE1BY/m
VE3BMV/W4/mm - car submerged in the salt water canal in Miami beach

Reg Edwards wrote:
What I find so intriguing is what the 'taper proponents' intend to do with
the 'taper' data when at last they have it in the form of numbers?

Taper "data"? I think the dispute is over the theoretical and the
philosophical. And of the pictures describing the phenomenon.

73, Jim AC6XG

oUsama (Yuri Blanarovich) wrote in message
The flat earth society will argue that it can be only 0.1 dB improvement, but I saw on average about 7 S-units boost.

Nope. The low 1 db or less figures we tend to harp on is the amount of
modeling error one would likely see. Not related to antenna
improvement by relocating loading coils or addign top loading. I see 2
S units increase on average just from adding the lower 3 ft mast to
mine. "75m" 7 S units is impressive, and fairly believable to me if
the original antenna had a low coil, and no top loading on 160m. That
would tend to indicate you have quite a bit of ground loss to see that
difference. "normal on 160" You have to be real careful when placing
coils and loading wires above sheet metal though. Any sheet metal too
close to the coil or upper whip, and it will totally kill the
performance. I once tried running 2 Vee loading wires from above the
coil, to the front of the car. The antenna was mounted on the trunk
behind the back window. "chevy monte carlo" But it didn't work. The
wires ended up too close to the hood and roof. It might have been ok
if I had a mast on the front of the car to elevate the wires higher
off the car. I sold that car, and now only drive the truck at the
moment. The truck gets the antenna higher overall, but it's more of a
pain because I have an aluminum camper shell on the back. Thats one
reason why I keep the coil well above the roofline...I think it helps
a bit that the antenna is mounted next to a window rather than all
metal.
It only sees a horizontal strip running across, and it's well below
the coil.
I guess your loading wires were far enough away from the body not to
be effected. If it does couple to the body, the antenna will "act"
like it's working, IE: tuning, etc, but will resemble a dummy load
when you try to use it. When I rig up loading wires, I'll run them off
away from the truck to a tree or something. Thats how I currently can
work 160 using my 80-10 antenna. It works fairly well because I'm
using fairly few turns of coil, and a pretty long loading wire. Takes
like 25-30 ft or so if I remember right.
MK

"Reg Edwards" wrote in message

What I find so intriguing is what the 'taper proponents' intend to do with
the 'taper' data when at last they have it in the form of numbers? Of what
use is it? Into what are the numbers inserted? What is the next stage in
the proposed modelling process?

You got me. Note that Wes mentioned on his web page that the lumped
coils he modeled, seemed to more resemble "real world" results than
the distributed coils he tried. MK

"Reg Edwards" wrote in message
...
"Yuri Blanarovich" wrote -

Efiiciency of the loaded radiator is roughly proportional to the area
sniped)
=========================

form
distribution. Nothing wrong with that of course. Especially if everybody
makes the SAME assumption.


Reg I really like the above sentence of yours, do you have an English
background
by any chance?

When everybody agrees with an assumption it usually means that the
assumption was
made by a lemming and all the others are followers, knowing full well every
body
cannot be fired, only those who dare to stand alone.
Cheers and beers
Art


----
Reg, G4FGQ