|
Dummy Load Antenna
Has anyone ever tried putting a dipole antenna up with the center insulator
being a high power 50 ohm dummy load,then connecting the dipole elements across the dummy load.This would always keep a suitable match at 50 ohms and satisfy the transceiver.Would most of the power go to the dummy load and not the elements and wouldn't radiate.In thinking about this it all logically makes sense the load would really never change or would it have some reactance with the dipole elements. Thanx All Howard VE4ISP |
Dummy Load Antenna
Howard,
Yes. Been some years ago now, but there was even a commercial version sold (did pretty well too). Wish I could remember the name of that thingy. - 'Doc |
Dummy Load Antenna
Howard Kowall wrote:
Has anyone ever tried putting a dipole antenna up with the center insulator being a high power 50 ohm dummy load,then connecting the dipole elements across the dummy load. Yes. There was a commercial antenna quite a few years ago that did just that. I think QST did a review on it. It wasn't advertised as a resistor across the end of the coax, but they either tore the thing apart or X-rayed it, and there it was. This would always keep a suitable match at 50 ohms and satisfy the transceiver. Would most of the power go to the dummy load and not the elements and wouldn't radiate.In thinking about this it all logically makes sense the load would really never change or would it have some reactance with the dipole elements. I guess, But, and hold on to your hat... 50 ohms SWR is not an indication that an antenna works at all, much less that it works well! Imagine where the power is going to and what it is becoming. To the resistor, and it is becoming heat. Anything that is radiated is almost an accident. - 73 de Mike N3LI - |
Dummy Load Antenna
"Howard Kowall" wrote in message
... Has anyone ever tried putting a dipole antenna up with the center insulator being a high power 50 ohm dummy load,then connecting the dipole elements across the dummy load.This would always keep a suitable match at 50 ohms and satisfy the transceiver.Would most of the power go to the dummy load and not the elements and wouldn't radiate.In thinking about this it all logically makes sense the load would really never change or would it have some reactance with the dipole elements. Thanx All Howard VE4ISP It's lossy, but antenna tuners might be too much fiddling. |
Dummy Load Antenna
On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 08:11:04 -0500, Howard Kowall wrote:
Has anyone ever tried putting a dipole antenna up with the center insulator being a high power 50 ohm dummy load,then connecting the dipole elements across the dummy load. This would always keep a suitable match at 50 ohms and satisfy the transceiver. You seem to understand nothing about parallel resistances/reactances. |
Dummy Load Antenna
On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 08:11:04 -0500, "Howard Kowall"
wrote: Has anyone ever tried putting a dipole antenna up with the center insulator being a high power 50 ohm dummy load,then connecting the dipole elements across the dummy load.(...) There was some phony antenna that when tested turned out to be nothing but a resistor across the feed point. Google search and my fading memory couldn't recall the name. The VSWR was great, but nothing else about the antenna was useful, probably due to all your RF power being dissipated in the 50 ohm load instead of being radiated by the antenna. A squashed rhombic with an approximately 500 ohm resistor does have some proponents. See: http://www.hard-core-dx.com/nordicdx/antenna/wire/t2fd.html http://www.hard-core-dx.com/nordicdx/antenna/wire/t2design.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T2FD_Antenna Search Google for "T2FD antenna". -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
Dummy Load Antenna
Howard Kowall wrote:
Has anyone ever tried putting a dipole antenna up with the center insulator being a high power 50 ohm dummy load,then connecting the dipole elements across the dummy load.This would always keep a suitable match at 50 ohms and satisfy the transceiver.Would most of the power go to the dummy load and not the elements and wouldn't radiate.In thinking about this it all logically makes sense the load would really never change or would it have some reactance with the dipole elements. Thanx All Howard VE4ISP When you run a 73 ohm "resistor" and a 50 ohm resistor in parallel? You would need a balun (rf transformer) to match to that antenna ... Then you would need a suitable name for it. Let me see, we are mating up a "dummy load" with a "dipole." How about "Dummy-Pole?" grin Regards, JS |
Dummy Load Antenna
Howard Kowall wrote:
Has anyone ever tried putting a dipole antenna up with the center insulator being a high power 50 ohm dummy load,then connecting the dipole elements across the dummy load.This would always keep a suitable match at 50 ohms and satisfy the transceiver.Would most of the power go to the dummy load and not the elements and wouldn't radiate.In thinking about this it all logically makes sense the load would really never change or would it have some reactance with the dipole elements. Thanx All Howard VE4ISP You would probably be better off loss-wise just using 1000' of RG58 feedline......same result; lots of loss, low SWR. Rick - W7RT |
Dummy Load Antenna
You're probably thinking of the B&W multi-band folded dipoles.
Very expensive. Great SWR. -- -larry K8UT wrote in message ... Howard, Yes. Been some years ago now, but there was even a commercial version sold (did pretty well too). Wish I could remember the name of that thingy. - 'Doc |
Dummy Load Antenna
On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 10:07:03 -0700, John Smith
wrote: You would need a balun (rf transformer) to match to that antenna ... Then you would need a suitable name for it. Let me see, we are mating up a "dummy load" with a "dipole." How about "Dummy-Pole?" grin Been there, done that. About 30 years ago, I went on a field day exercise where one of the HF stations was running a lightbulb on a pole for an antenna. 100 watts RF, about 50ft of RG-8/u, voltage stepped down with some kind of xfomer or balun, and a 150 watt incandescent light bulb. I don't recall how well they did, but I could see that the log was filling with contacts. Who needs an antenna anyway? -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
Dummy Load Antenna
"Howard Kowall" wrote in
: Has anyone ever tried putting a dipole antenna up with the center insulator being a high power 50 ohm dummy load,then connecting the dipole elements across the dummy load.This would always keep a suitable match at 50 ohms and satisfy the transceiver.Would most of the power go to the dummy load and not the elements and wouldn't radiate.In thinking about this it all logically makes sense the load would really never change or would it have some reactance with the dipole elements. Thanx All Howard VE4ISP Firstly, your proposal does not produce a 50 ohms antenna at all frequencies. Your circuit analysis skills are lacking. Various antennas include a resistance somewhere, and although it means loss, it limits the feedline VSWR excursions with frequency and the loss in the resistor may be more than offset by the reduction of feedline loss at some frequencies. Owen |
Dummy Load Antenna
Owen Duffy writes:
Various antennas include a resistance somewhere, and although it means loss, it limits the feedline VSWR excursions with frequency and the loss in the resistor may be more than offset by the reduction of feedline loss at some frequencies. Not so useful for most amateur applications, but very useful for what remains of professional HF radio. Frequency agility is often required, particularly by the military, and operators either don't have time, or skill, to fiddle with antenna tuners. Unless you are manpack portable, the loss of signal can be made up by increasing power. Automatic antenna tuners are getting ever better, though. May be these designs are getting less popular. LA4RT Jon |
Dummy Load Antenna
Bob Schreibmaier wrote:
In article , says... Has anyone ever tried putting a dipole antenna up with the center insulator being a high power 50 ohm dummy load,then connecting the dipole elements across the dummy load.This would always keep a suitable match at 50 ohms and satisfy the transceiver.Would most of the power go to the dummy load and not the elements and wouldn't radiate.In thinking about this it all logically makes sense the load would really never change or would it have some reactance with the dipole elements. Thanx All Howard VE4ISP That is very similar to what the Maxcom Antenna Matcher did. It was reviewed (and panned) in November 1984 QST. As you suspected, almost all the power would go into the dummy load and very little would be radiated. Honestly, it's not a very good idea. :-) This one is meant to be a poor antenna, for use at really close distances. http://www.wa0dx.org/wa0itp/dlspecial.html Here is the gold standard, the MaxCom. If you gan get the link, QST had a review. It was a toroid, and 3 resistors. Apparently a very high quality dummy load (these things cost between 600 to 900 dollars! http://www.eham.net/articles/14905 Had great SWR tho'! - 73 de Mike N3LI - |
Dummy Load Antenna
On Oct 9, 3:27*pm, Michael Coslo wrote:
Bob Schreibmaier wrote: In article , says.... Has anyone ever tried putting a dipole antenna up with the center insulator being a high power 50 ohm dummy load,then connecting the *dipole elements across the dummy load.This would always keep a *suitable match *at 50 ohms and satisfy the transceiver.Would most of the power go to the dummy load and not the elements and wouldn't radiate.In thinking about this it all logically makes sense the load would really never change or would it have some reactance with the dipole elements. Thanx All Howard VE4ISP That is very similar to what the Maxcom Antenna Matcher did. *It was reviewed (and panned) in November 1984 QST. As you suspected, almost all the power would go into the dummy load and very little would be radiated. Honestly, it's not a very good idea. *:-) This one is meant to be a poor antenna, for use at really close distances.. http://www.wa0dx.org/wa0itp/dlspecial.html Here is the gold standard, the MaxCom. If you gan get the link, QST had a review. It was a toroid, and 3 resistors. Apparently a very high quality dummy load (these things cost between 600 to 900 dollars! http://www.eham.net/articles/14905 Had great SWR tho'! - 73 de Mike N3LI -- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Once I joke about using a CB groundplane with a 10 db pad for an all band antenna. I thought about this for a while and decided to try it. I did nt have to use 10 db maybe it was only 3db or 6db I cant remember now to get an antenna that my soliddtate transceiver with no tuner was happy with on allHF bands. I was fairly amazed at how well the antenna worked or at least amazed that it did work at all. Jimmie |
Dummy Load Antenna
On Oct 8, 1:07*pm, John Smith wrote:
Howard Kowall wrote: Has anyone ever tried putting a dipole antenna up with the center insulator being a high power 50 ohm dummy load,then connecting the *dipole elements across the dummy load.This would always keep a *suitable match *at 50 ohms and satisfy the transceiver.Would most of the power go to the dummy load and not the elements and wouldn't radiate.In thinking about this it all logically makes sense the load would really never change or would it have some reactance with the dipole elements. Thanx All Howard VE4ISP When you run a 73 ohm "resistor" and a 50 ohm resistor in parallel? You would need a balun (rf transformer) to match to that antenna ... Then you would need a suitable name for it. *Let me see, we are mating up a "dummy load" with a "dipole." *How about "Dummy-Pole?" *grin Regards, JS I'm glad you called it a 'balun (rf transformer)' instead of a 'balun (CM Choke)'. Did Cecil review this before you posted it? |
Dummy Load Antenna
That is very similar to what the Maxcom Antenna Matcher
did. It was reviewed (and panned) in November 1984 QST. As you suspected, almost all the power would go into the dummy load and very little would be radiated. Honestly, it's not a very good idea. :-) 73, Bob K3PH Hello, and generally not if maximizing operating efficiency (the portion of available transmitter power that is being radiated by the antenna) is of concern. However, placing a low-loss pad between the output of one device and the input of another can be a simple, inexpensive broadband matching technique if the power loss in the pad can be tolerated . Sincerely, and 73s from N4GGO, John Wood (Code 5550) e-mail: Naval Research Laboratory 4555 Overlook Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20375-5337 |
Dummy Load Antenna
JIMMIE wrote:
Once I joke about using a CB groundplane with a 10 db pad for an all band antenna. I thought about this for a while and decided to try it. I did nt have to use 10 db maybe it was only 3db or 6db I cant remember now to get an antenna that my soliddtate transceiver with no tuner was happy with on allHF bands. I was fairly amazed at how well the antenna worked or at least amazed that it did work at all. What is more, you didn't have to spend 600 dollars for a bad antenna. - 73 de Mike N3LI - |
Dummy Load Antenna
J. B. Wood wrote:
That is very similar to what the Maxcom Antenna Matcher did. It was reviewed (and panned) in November 1984 QST. As you suspected, almost all the power would go into the dummy load and very little would be radiated. Honestly, it's not a very good idea. :-) 73, Bob K3PH Hello, and generally not if maximizing operating efficiency (the portion of available transmitter power that is being radiated by the antenna) is of concern. However, placing a low-loss pad between the output of one device and the input of another can be a simple, inexpensive broadband matching technique if the power loss in the pad can be tolerated . Sincerely, and 73s from N4GGO, But as a good operating practice, Hams usually want to have efficient ways to transfer their limited power. It's in that realm between extremes - the Person who never puts up an antenna because nothing is perfect enough, and the person who is willing to waste almost all their power in the name of Low SWR, or maximum convenience. IMO, it's best to settle somewhere towards the more efficient end of that group. Which I guess is why I have a big ungainly Bug-Catcher type antenna on the car instead of a short and cute whip. - 73 de Mike N3LI - |
Dummy Load Antenna
In article , Michael Coslo
wrote: Which I guess is why I have a big ungainly Bug-Catcher type antenna on the car instead of a short and cute whip. - 73 de Mike N3LI - Hello, and you can have a physically short and efficient whip if you choose an appropriate frequency band ;-). Now what ever happened to those cute car-mount cell phone antennas? Guess they're in antenna heaven along with the K40s. Sincerely, John Wood (Code 5550) e-mail: Naval Research Laboratory 4555 Overlook Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20375-5337 |
Dummy Load Antenna
"J. B. Wood" wrote in message ... That is very similar to what the Maxcom Antenna Matcher did. It was reviewed (and panned) in November 1984 QST. As you suspected, almost all the power would go into the dummy load and very little would be radiated. Honestly, it's not a very good idea. :-) 73, Bob K3PH Hello, and generally not if maximizing operating efficiency (the portion of available transmitter power that is being radiated by the antenna) is of concern. However, placing a low-loss pad between the output of one device and the input of another can be a simple, inexpensive broadband matching technique if the power loss in the pad can be tolerated . Sincerely, and 73s from N4GGO, John Wood (Code 5550) e-mail: Naval Research Laboratory 4555 Overlook Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20375-5337 I was wondering when we would hear from someone like you. |
Dummy Load Antenna
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 11:27:09 -0400, (J. B. Wood)
wrote: Now what ever happened to those cute car-mount cell phone antennas? Guess they're in antenna heaven along with the K40s. Sincerely, Nope. The cell phone antenna on the vehicle roof has been replaced by a GPS telematics antenna, GPS map antenna, wi-fi war driver antenna, XM/Sirius DAB antenna, GPRS antenna, and possibly a mobile DTV antenna. Aerodynamics and safety have dictated that today's vehicles have curved roofs and air bags in the door columns, making most permanent roof top antennas impossible. Besides, most of today's cell phones do not include an external antenna connector or need a car kit "docking station". Besides, modern cell phones have to handle a wide variety of frequencies for world cellular coverage, GPS, wi-fi, Bluegoof, mobile TV, WiMax, and whatever else can be crammed in. A single external antenna just isn't going to work without a diplexer and multiple connectors. At least the antennas are now all internal or the typical smartphone will look like a porcupine antenna farm, or if retractable, a Swiss army knife. Incidentally, the K40 has been replaced by the Wilson 1000 and 5000 as the mobild CB antenna of choice. http://www.wilsonantenna.com/w1000.htm http://www.wilsonantenna.com/W5000.htm Good to 5,000 watts AM or 20,000 watts SSB. For mounting elsewhere on the vehicle, there are antennas with oversized stainless base or center loading coils that could probably survive a direct lightning hit. Of course, you need two of them with a "co-phasing" harness. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
Dummy Load Antenna
In article ,
Michael Coslo wrote: JIMMIE wrote: Once I joke about using a CB groundplane with a 10 db pad for an all band antenna. I thought about this for a while and decided to try it. I did nt have to use 10 db maybe it was only 3db or 6db I cant remember now to get an antenna that my soliddtate transceiver with no tuner was happy with on allHF bands. I was fairly amazed at how well the antenna worked or at least amazed that it did work at all. What is more, you didn't have to spend 600 dollars for a bad antenna. - 73 de Mike N3LI - Years ago, I was working on a Marine HF Radio, on the bench, in Seattle WA, connected to a Bird 1 Kw Dummy Load. As I was setting the -16 db Pilot Carrier Level for the Public Coast Station KMI, at Point Rayes CA, on 12 Mhz, I got a reply from the Operator, ON Duty, asking for Station Call Sign. I had a nice chat with him for about 5 minutes. ANY antenna, no matter how it is built, even a Dummy Load, will radiate, and communicate IF the Band is open. If the Band is closed, it doesn't matter how efficient the antenna is, you will not communicate. -- Bruce in alaska add path after fast to reply |
Dummy Load Antenna
"JB" wrote in message ... "J. B. Wood" wrote in message ... That is very similar to what the Maxcom Antenna Matcher did. It was reviewed (and panned) in November 1984 QST. As you suspected, almost all the power would go into the dummy load and very little would be radiated. Honestly, it's not a very good idea. :-) 73, Bob K3PH Hello, and generally not if maximizing operating efficiency (the portion of available transmitter power that is being radiated by the antenna) is of concern. However, placing a low-loss pad between the output of one device and the input of another can be a simple, inexpensive broadband matching technique if the power loss in the pad can be tolerated . Sincerely, and 73s from N4GGO, John Wood (Code 5550) e-mail: Naval Research Laboratory 4555 Overlook Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20375-5337 I was wondering when we would hear from someone like you. --------- When using the radio with the padded antenna in a city environment and when utilizing nearby repeaters, it is quite acceptable to design equipment this way. It also reduces the sensitivity of the radio to unfortunate antenna shorts against automobile interiors or body parts. If you have enough power left over to be DFQ into the repeaters with the power available, I see it as a viable compromise that can be most beneficial. Hams tend to think in terms of operating simplex out into the far reaches of the aether, but there are many situations where padding is a useful feature. Ed, NM2K |
Dummy Load Antenna
Doesn't B&W do exactly that?
They called it a "balancing network" or some such thing...a resistor. Army published a paper on it in the 40's or 50's. Problem is the loss it causes. -GC W2DB wrote in message ... Howard, Yes. Been some years ago now, but there was even a commercial version sold (did pretty well too). Wish I could remember the name of that thingy. - 'Doc |
Dummy Load Antenna
http://www.bwantennas.com/ama/fdipole.ama.htm
http://www.bwantennas.com/ama/veeant.ama.htm "Howard Kowall" wrote in message ... Has anyone ever tried putting a dipole antenna up with the center insulator being a high power 50 ohm dummy load,then connecting the dipole elements across the dummy load.This would always keep a suitable match at 50 ohms and satisfy the transceiver.Would most of the power go to the dummy load and not the elements and wouldn't radiate.In thinking about this it all logically makes sense the load would really never change or would it have some reactance with the dipole elements. Thanx All Howard VE4ISP |
Dummy Load Antenna
From an offshore site:
http://www.radiohc.org/Distributions/Dxers/ttfd2.html http://www.hard-core-dx.com/nordicdx...wire/t2fd.html http://www.universal-radio.com/catalog/sw_ant/0562.html http://www.johncon.com/john/T2fd/ http://www.wellbrook.uk.com/UMBT2FD.html http://home.comcast.net/~smithab11/T2FD.htm http://www.korpi.biz/t2fd.pdf http://p1k.arrl.org/cgi-bin/topdf.cgi?id=29006&pub=qst (if you have a arrl membership) "George Csahanin" wrote in message ... Doesn't B&W do exactly that? They called it a "balancing network" or some such thing...a resistor. Army published a paper on it in the 40's or 50's. Problem is the loss it causes. -GC W2DB wrote in message ... Howard, Yes. Been some years ago now, but there was even a commercial version sold (did pretty well too). Wish I could remember the name of that thingy. - 'Doc |
Dummy Load Antenna
|
Dummy Load Antenna
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 10:07:03 -0700, John Smith wrote: ... Then you would need a suitable name for it. Let me see, we are mating up a "dummy load" with a "dipole." How about "Dummy-Pole?" grin Been there, done that. About 30 years ago, I went on a field day exercise where one of the HF stations was running a lightbulb on a pole for an antenna. 100 watts RF, about 50ft of RG-8/u, voltage stepped down with some kind of xfomer or balun, and a 150 watt incandescent light bulb. I don't recall how well they did, but I could see that the log was filling with contacts. Who needs an antenna anyway? Hmmm, sounds like that you mention might be the "Original DummyPole!" Or, "DummyPole I." This new design should probably be named "DummyPole II." grin Regards, JS |
Dummy Load Antenna
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 18:03:39 -0700, John Smith
wrote: Hmmm, sounds like that you mention might be the "Original DummyPole!" Or, "DummyPole I." This new design should probably be named "DummyPole II." grin Nope. I vaguely recall it was called a "lamptenna". Somewhat later, I helped build a dipole using four 4ft fluorescent tubes (two in each leg of the dipole hung horizontally on bamboo poles). The 96" length was about right for a 10 meter dipole. About 80 watts out got the bulbs to light up. Once lit, the tubes were quite conductive and made a functional transmit antenna and impressive light show. It was totally useless for CW, kinda marginal for SSB, and just great for AM. We had RTTY but couldn't find anyone to help test it. We never did figure out how to light up the bulbs so we could try receive. Various gross violations of the electrical code and of common sense were attempted with no useful results. There are those that can see the light... -- # Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060 # 831-336-2558 # http://802.11junk.com # http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS |
Dummy Load Antenna
From an offshore site:
http://www.radiohc.org/Distributions/Dxers/ttfd2.html http://www.hard-core-dx.com/nordicdx...wire/t2fd.html http://www.universal-radio.com/catalog/sw_ant/0562.html http://www.johncon.com/john/T2fd/ http://www.wellbrook.uk.com/UMBT2FD.html http://home.comcast.net/~smithab11/T2FD.htm http://www.korpi.biz/t2fd.pdf "George Csahanin" wrote in message ... Doesn't B&W do exactly that? They called it a "balancing network" or some such thing...a resistor. Army published a paper on it in the 40's or 50's. Problem is the loss it causes. -GC W2DB wrote in message ... Howard, Yes. Been some years ago now, but there was even a commercial version sold (did pretty well too). Wish I could remember the name of that thingy. - 'Doc |
Dummy Load Antenna
Was an outfit here in the U.S actually "Marketed" such!
With claims that would give less than 3:1 SWR, on any frequency! Wondered how it could do that and still perform- asked buddy (engineer) and this was the "Black Box" he came up with! (50 ohm, 200 watt, non inductive resistor! No majic involved, just a Dummy Load, in parallel with a couple pieces of wire! Think ARRL, finally exposed it! Yes it will radiate, but at WHAT effeciency?? Jim NN7K wrote: On Oct 8, 1:07 pm, John Smith wrote: Howard Kowall wrote: Has anyone ever tried putting a dipole antenna up with the center insulator being a high power 50 ohm dummy load,then connecting the dipole elements across the dummy load.This would always keep a suitable match at 50 ohms and satisfy the transceiver.Would most of the power go to the dummy load and not the elements and wouldn't radiate.In thinking about this it all logically makes sense the load would really never change or would it have some reactance with the dipole elements. Thanx All Howard VE4ISP |
Dummy Load Antenna
Jim-NN7K wrote:
Was an outfit here in the U.S actually "Marketed" such! With claims that would give less than 3:1 SWR, on any frequency! Wondered how it could do that and still perform- asked buddy (engineer) and this was the "Black Box" he came up with! (50 ohm, 200 watt, non inductive resistor! No majic involved, just a Dummy Load, in parallel with a couple pieces of wire! Think ARRL, finally exposed it! Yes it will radiate, but at WHAT effeciency?? Jim NN7K Makes me wonder if you have been paying attention?; indeed, it has been the arrl which has been "exposed!" ROFLOL! Regards, JS |
Dummy Load Antenna
John Smith wrote:
Jim-NN7K wrote: Was an outfit here in the U.S actually "Marketed" such! With claims that would give less than 3:1 SWR, on any frequency! Wondered how it could do that and still perform- asked buddy (engineer) and this was the "Black Box" he came up with! (50 ohm, 200 watt, non inductive resistor! No majic involved, just a Dummy Load, in parallel with a couple pieces of wire! Think ARRL, finally exposed it! Yes it will radiate, but at WHAT effeciency?? Jim NN7K Makes me wonder if you have been paying attention?; indeed, it has been the arrl which has been "exposed!" ROFLOL! Regards, JS 'Corse, this WAS from memory, of this antenna-- From some 25 YEARS ago! When it was first introduced! Hindsight is always better than Foresight! :) Jim |
Dummy Load Antenna
Bruce in alaska wrote:
In article , Michael Coslo wrote: JIMMIE wrote: Once I joke about using a CB groundplane with a 10 db pad for an all band antenna. I thought about this for a while and decided to try it. I did nt have to use 10 db maybe it was only 3db or 6db I cant remember now to get an antenna that my soliddtate transceiver with no tuner was happy with on allHF bands. I was fairly amazed at how well the antenna worked or at least amazed that it did work at all. What is more, you didn't have to spend 600 dollars for a bad antenna. - 73 de Mike N3LI - Years ago, I was working on a Marine HF Radio, on the bench, in Seattle WA, connected to a Bird 1 Kw Dummy Load. As I was setting the -16 db Pilot Carrier Level for the Public Coast Station KMI, at Point Rayes CA, on 12 Mhz, I got a reply from the Operator, ON Duty, asking for Station Call Sign. I had a nice chat with him for about 5 minutes. ANY antenna, no matter how it is built, even a Dummy Load, will radiate, and communicate IF the Band is open. If the Band is closed, it doesn't matter how efficient the antenna is, you will not communicate. But we shouldn't have to spend 600 dollars to find that out! ;^) While it is true that at ceratin times, anything will "get out", and at other times, nothing does, there is a whole range in between. I did some mobile contesting this weekend, and the consequences of having a bit more efficent and productive antenna were apparent. Mor QSO's, and less time spent doing multiple exchange sends. And wow, the bands were weird this past weekend. But given the results of shootouts, it is clear that having a good mobile antenna will add quite a bit of punch to your signal. IIRC the Hamsticks were about 20 db down (Cecil, I think you had some test results, so correct me if I'm way off). - 73 de Mike N3LI - |
"Dummy Load" is what you get when John "dumbass" Smith busts anut..in some poor faggots backside!
On Oct 13, 11:22*am, Michael Coslo wrote:
Bruce in alaska wrote: In article , *Michael Coslo wrote: JIMMIE wrote: Once I joke about using a CB groundplane with a 10 db pad for an all band antenna. I thought about this for a while and decided to try it. I did nt have to use 10 db maybe it was only 3db or 6db I cant remember now to get an antenna that my soliddtate transceiver with no tuner was happy with on allHF bands. I was fairly amazed at how well the *antenna worked or at least amazed that it did work at all. What is more, you didn't have to spend 600 dollars for a bad antenna. * * * *- 73 de Mike N3LI - Years ago, I was working on a Marine HF Radio, on the bench, in Seattle WA, connected to a Bird 1 Kw Dummy Load. As I was setting the -16 db Pilot Carrier Level for the Public Coast Station KMI, at Point Rayes CA, on 12 Mhz, I got a reply from the Operator, ON Duty, asking for Station Call Sign. I had a nice chat with him for about 5 minutes. ANY antenna, no matter how it is built, even a Dummy Load, will radiate, and communicate IF the Band is open. *If the Band is closed, it doesn't matter how efficient the antenna is, you will not communicate. But we shouldn't have to spend 600 dollars to find that out! ;^) While it is true that at ceratin times, anything will "get out", and at other times, nothing does, there is a whole range in between. I did some mobile contesting this weekend, and the consequences of having a bit more efficent and productive antenna were apparent. Mor QSO's, and less time spent doing multiple exchange sends. And wow, the bands were weird this past weekend. But given the results of shootouts, it is clear that having a good mobile antenna will add quite a bit of punch to your signal. IIRC the Hamsticks were about 20 db down (Cecil, I think you had some test results, so correct me if I'm way off). * * * * - 73 de Mike N3LI -- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:11 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com