Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#26
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mark, NM5K wrote:
"What FIRST got me to model his "loopole" was his claim that you could get collinear gain with his device." Art`s unexplained claims amazed me so I jotted them down. 1) More gain than other antennas 2) Useable SWR`s also 3) Rotatable with under 200 ft turning space 4) No heavier than the lightest antennas on the market 5) Can be made wide banded 6) Can be made narrow banded 7) Can be made variable frequency operative 8) Can be automated for maximum gain 9) Can be automated for best SWR As I recall, all those claims come from one posting but the list may be incomplete. I responded that the posting seemed an advert. Art seems to ignore in his "loopole" that tight coupling means resonances in the loop and pole are interactive, not independent. Art should produce some numbers to back gain and SWR superiority claims. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Inverted ground plane antenna: compared with normal GP and low dipole. | Antenna | |||
Three short simple questions about antennas | Antenna | |||
Poor quality low + High TV channels? How much dB in Preamp? | Antenna | |||
QST Article: An Easy to Build, Dual-Band Collinear Antenna | Antenna |