|
Antenna for shortwave reception
Folks,
I have purchased a Sangean ATS-909 World Receiver. It is equipped with an internal ferrite antenna för MW and LW, and a telescope antenna for SW and FM. It also comes with a portable SW antenna (ANT-60), seven meters long. Is this external antenna generally sufficient for SW reception, or should I get a different antenna? If yes, is there a solution that doesn't cost all that much money? I have a copy of the 2009 World Radio TV Handbook, and they are talking about a Wellbrook ALA-1530+ loop antenna, and let me tell you, that one is well past my budget, because it costs $466... I am looking for something a lot cheaper... :-) If it is recommended to replace the ANT-60, that is. PJ |
Antenna for shortwave reception
On Tue, 23 Dec 2008 09:46:07 -0800 (PST), PJ
wrote: Folks, I have purchased a Sangean ATS-909 World Receiver. It is equipped with an internal ferrite antenna för MW and LW, and a telescope antenna for SW and FM. It also comes with a portable SW antenna (ANT-60), seven meters long. Is this external antenna generally sufficient for SW reception, or should I get a different antenna? If yes, is there a solution that doesn't cost all that much money? I have a copy of the 2009 World Radio TV Handbook, and they are talking about a Wellbrook ALA-1530+ loop antenna, and let me tell you, that one is well past my budget, because it costs $466... I am looking for something a lot cheaper... :-) If it is recommended to replace the ANT-60, that is. PJ Hi PJ, With your location in Sweden, a long wire should pick up a lot of stations unless you are buried deep in a valley. That long wire can be as simple as 10 meters of wire with a clip to attach it to the whip of the Sangean. When I was in Africa last year, that was enough to fill my cheap SW set with signals from everywhere in Africa up into Europe. Toss the wire out a window up into a tree. It is at least a cheap, first attempt to see if you need anything more than that. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Antenna for shortwave reception
On Dec 23, 10:23*am, Richard Clark wrote:
On Tue, 23 Dec 2008 09:46:07 -0800 (PST), PJ wrote: Folks, I have purchased a Sangean ATS-909 World Receiver. It is equipped with an internal ferrite antenna för MW and LW, and a telescope antenna for SW and FM. It also comes with a portable SW antenna (ANT-60), seven meters long. Is this external antenna generally sufficient for SW reception, or should I get a different antenna? If yes, is there a solution that doesn't cost all that much money? I have a copy of the 2009 World Radio TV Handbook, and they are talking about a Wellbrook ALA-1530+ loop antenna, and let me tell you, that one is well past my budget, because it costs $466... I am looking for something a lot cheaper... :-) If it is recommended to replace the ANT-60, that is. PJ Hi PJ, With your location in Sweden, a long wire should pick up a lot of stations unless you are buried deep in a valley. *That long wire can be as simple as 10 meters of wire with a clip to attach it to the whip of the Sangean. *When I was in Africa last year, that was enough to fill my cheap SW set with signals from everywhere in Africa up into Europe. *Toss the wire out a window up into a tree. *It is at least a cheap, first attempt to see if you need anything more than that. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Should be very careful when connecting the whip to the ATS-909 antenna with a metal clip - the radio is quite sensitive and should be turned off while "clipping". For my connection, I just wound a coil of insulated wire that would slip over the whip - the inductance alone is enough to bring in signals strongly, and avoids the chance of possible static and internal damage. About 20 turns is enough to get you started; wind more if you want a stronger signal. Bruce |
Antenna for shortwave reception
PJ,
I've discovered there is no best antenna for everyone for shortwave listening. Ignore the trolls here, start off with your wire antenna, then experiment if you wish. I've tried a few things over the past few weeks and for me, just running a wire along the ground about 60 feet works best for me. I guess the only certain thing is that an antenna that runs outside will work better than an inside antenna. If you can't run one outside, try to put it by a window or up high in your house/apartment. Experimenting is part of the fun, just google around, play around, and have hours of fun on your new radio. I only in the last few weeks have rediscovered listening to SW radio. Happy listening. |
Antenna for shortwave reception
On Dec 23, 9:46*am, PJ wrote:
Folks, I have purchased a Sangean ATS-909 World Receiver. It is equipped with an internal ferrite antenna för MW and LW, and a telescope antenna for SW and FM. It also comes with a portable SW antenna (ANT-60), seven meters long. Is this external antenna generally sufficient for SW reception, or should I get a different antenna? If yes, is there a solution that doesn't cost all that much money? I have a copy of the 2009 World Radio TV Handbook, and they are talking about a Wellbrook ALA-1530+ loop antenna, and let me tell you, that one is well past my budget, because it costs $466... I am looking for something a lot cheaper... :-) If it is recommended to replace the ANT-60, that is. PJ PJ, So your objective is to 'buy' a relatively low cost Antenna for Shortwave Radio Listening (SWL) to use with your Sangean ATS-909 World Receiver. Check-Out the / Sangean ATS-909 Users Group -aka- RadioShack DX-398 Users Group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DX398/ Consider using a "Portable Wire Antenna" with your Sangean ATS-909 AM/FM Shortwave Radio : http://www.geocities.com/n2uhc/portablewire.html * WebPage presented by Tom Sevart, N2UHC http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...c73c4c94625fc7 http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...89c8fd6fcb38f2 First "About" the Antenna Input of the Sangean ATS-909 AM/FM Shortwave Radio : The Sangean ATS-909 uses a 1/8" Stereo Jack for the External Antenna Input. Barrel = Circuit-Board-Ground (RF Signal Ground) Tip = Shortwave Antenna RF Signal Input Middle-Ring = AM/MW Antenna RF Signal Input READY-MADE - Shortwave Listener (SWL) Antenna that fits into the 45 Foot Long Range is the Par Electronics EF-SWL Antenna. [~$75US] It come with the Matching Transformer and 45 Feet of Flex-Weave Wire Antenna Element; and all you need to do is Install your Ground Rod; Rig the Wire Antenna Element; and Attach your Coax Cable. http://www.parelectronics.com/swl_end.htm http://www.grove-ent.com/ANT8.html http://www.universal-radio.com/catalog/sw_ant/2205.html The Par EF-SWL is a moderate size Inverted "L" Antenna with 'low noise' characteristics : The PAR is the simplest Antenna for most of these 'portable' AM/FM Shortwave Radios and lends itself to the Inverted "L" Antenna configuration of about 45 Feet long with a 15 Foot Vertical-Up-Leg and a 30 Foot Horizontal-Out-Arm. With an Eight Ground Rod at the base and a Coax Cable feed-in-line. NOTE - Your biggest problem with using a Coax Cable with your Shortwave Antenna is coming up with an "Adapter" or Jumper Cable from the Coax Connector to the Radio's 1/8" Stereo Jack. Here is another 'low cost' SWL Antenna listed on eBay "Super Longwire All Band SW. Antenna and 9:1 Balun" http://cgi.ebay.com/_W0QQitemZ180315835723 * Has 80 Feet of Antenna Wire with a 9:1 Matching Transformer; plus 50 Feet of Coax Cable. * Rig as much of the 80 Feet of Antenna Wire in the Inverted "L" Configuration * Add an 8-foot Ground Rod * Run the Coax Cable to you Radio hope this helps - iane ~ RHF |
Antenna for shortwave reception
ALA-1530+ loop antenna, and let me tell you, that one is well past my
budget, because it costs $466... I am looking for something a lot cheaper... :-) If it is recommended to replace the ANT-60, that is. This is my favorite: http://www.antenna.it/military/log-periodic.htm But seriously folks, the cheapest for me was busting open a junk TV for the deflection coils. A qrp type ham antenna tuner will certainly help. Easy to build L type by using an AM tuning cap and hind wound coil on toilet paper roll. Use a piece of scrap brass for a slider. Put the whole thing on a block of wood and use clip leads to change it around for the best signal. The earphone jack can often be used for a ground point. |
Antenna for shortwave reception
JB wrote:
ALA-1530+ loop antenna, and let me tell you, that one is well past my budget, because it costs $466... I am looking for something a lot cheaper... :-) If it is recommended to replace the ANT-60, that is. This is my favorite: http://www.antenna.it/military/log-periodic.htm But seriously folks, the cheapest for me was busting open a junk TV for the deflection coils. A qrp type ham antenna tuner will certainly help. Easy to build L type by using an AM tuning cap and hind wound coil on toilet paper roll. Use a piece of scrap brass for a slider. Put the whole thing on a block of wood and use clip leads to change it around for the best signal. The earphone jack can often be used for a ground point. Huh, you triggered some memories. Best antenna I ever had was when I was very young, probably ~8-10 years old, or so. Long-wire which ran diagonally to property lines of my parents. And, certainly, longer than 120 ft. That antenna filled the bands, as I remember! No baluns, no matching, no knowledge of what I consider now, krist, it was most likely a very poor match to the input on the Collins, Hallicrafters, Zeniths, Gonsets, etc. which it was hooked to. But, ya' know what? Those were the best times of my life. And, to be absolutely truthful with you, I did hope to hear aliens--as well as military, gov't, etc. Some, I accomplished--but, no aliens which I am aware of .... :-( But, I never have had that much fun in my whole life, since those times .... the rest of life has been rather easy. I only hope youngsters can still find the same ... :-) Regards, JS |
Antenna for shortwave reception
On Dec 24, 8:54*pm, John Smith wrote:
JB wrote: ALA-1530+ loop antenna, and let me tell you, that one is well past my budget, because it costs $466... I am looking for something a lot cheaper... :-) If it is recommended to replace the ANT-60, that is. This is my favorite: http://www.antenna.it/military/log-periodic.htm But seriously folks, the cheapest for me was busting open a junk TV for the deflection coils. * A qrp type ham antenna tuner will certainly help. *Easy to build L type by using an AM tuning cap and hind wound coil on toilet paper roll. *Use a piece of scrap brass for a slider. *Put the whole thing on a block of wood and use clip leads to change it around for the best signal. The earphone jack can often be used for a ground point. Huh, you triggered some memories. *Best antenna I ever had was when I was very young, probably ~8-10 years old, or so. *Long-wire which ran diagonally to property lines of my parents. *And, certainly, longer than 120 ft. *That antenna filled the bands, as I remember! No baluns, no matching, no knowledge of what I consider now, krist, it was most likely a very poor match to the input on the Collins, Hallicrafters, Zeniths, Gonsets, etc. which it was hooked to. * But, ya' know what? *Those were the best times of my life. *And, to be absolutely truthful with you, I did hope to hear aliens--as well as military, gov't, etc. *Some, I accomplished--but, no aliens which I am aware of ... :-( But, I never have had that much fun in my whole life, since those times ... the rest of life has been rather easy. I only hope youngsters can still find the same ... :-) Regards, JS- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - When I was in my teensI had access to a 5 mile beverage antenna in the form of abandoned telegraph lines. I used to plug in the AM radio in my car to it and listen for AM BCB dx. I could terminate either end and hook up to the opposite end. In the day it was also a great way to park with my date. Yes those were great times. Jimmie |
Antenna for shortwave reception
JIMMIE wrote:
... When I was in my teensI had access to a 5 mile beverage antenna in the form of abandoned telegraph lines. I used to plug in the AM radio in my car to it and listen for AM BCB dx. I could terminate either end and hook up to the opposite end. In the day it was also a great way to park with my date. Yes those were great times. Jimmie Amen brother, I pity those who have never felt the thrill, the mystery, the wonder, the indescribable feeling--while very slowly turning that dial ... and finding "that" signal! Warmest regards, JS |
Antenna for shortwave reception
Folks,
This is the OP speaking. Thanks for all the various tips and tricks! I don't care much for the unpleasant tone between some posters in the rec.radio.shortwave group, but there are still a few glimpses of good information that I can use. I was a very keen DX:er in the seventies, and I used a Swedish vacuum tube radio from 1952, named Nornan LV 1220, with a continous SW band from 15 meters to 120 meters. I still have it, and it still works, but I thought that I'd go a little more modern with the ATS-909... :-) Although I think that the LV 1220 is just as good when it comes to SW reception. I remember that my dream, in the seventies, was to hear the AFAN (American Forces Antarctic Network) SW transmissions here in Sweden. They then used a 1 kW transmitter, and I had heard that someone in the south of Sweden had been able to hear them at some point. Alas, I never did. I am pretty sure that I picked up the carrier wave, but I couldn't hear anything... Bummer... In the 2009 WRTH the AFAN are only listed as an FM station, so I guess that those days are over... PJ |
Antenna for shortwave reception
But seriously folks, the cheapest for me was busting open a junk TV for
the deflection coils. A qrp type ham antenna tuner will certainly help. Easy to build L type by using an AM tuning cap and hind wound coil on toilet paper roll. Use a piece of scrap brass for a slider. Put the whole thing on a block of wood and use clip leads to change it around for the best signal. The earphone jack can often be used for a ground point. Huh, you triggered some memories. Best antenna I ever had was when I was very young, probably ~8-10 years old, or so. Long-wire which ran diagonally to property lines of my parents. And, certainly, longer than 120 ft. That antenna filled the bands, as I remember! No baluns, no matching, no knowledge of what I consider now, krist, it was most likely a very poor match to the input on the Collins, Hallicrafters, Zeniths, Gonsets, etc. which it was hooked to. But, ya' know what? Those were the best times of my life. And, to be absolutely truthful with you, I did hope to hear aliens--as well as military, gov't, etc. Some, I accomplished--but, no aliens which I am aware of ... :-( But, I never have had that much fun in my whole life, since those times ... the rest of life has been rather easy. I only hope youngsters can still find the same ... :-) Regards, JS Same age-- I ran the wire into a transistor radio and would tweak the trimmers to go above the broadcast band. Finally got a five band radio, then upgraded to a Hallicrafters S-110. Most of my vast entertainment center (set of shelves along my longest wall) was rescued/repaired/cobbled from junk, and open cabinets and exposed lethal voltages were part of the mistique. My finger was the best signal generator/voltmeter I owned. By High School I had my Advanced and 2nd phone and was into Remote Bases, HF, RTTY and especially liked working on stuff with multiple squelch tails. Then came computers. I guess I never really outgrew that stuff after all. |
Antenna for shortwave reception
"Richard Clark" wrote in message ... On Tue, 23 Dec 2008 09:46:07 -0800 (PST), PJ wrote: Folks, I have purchased a Sangean ATS-909 World Receiver. It is equipped with an internal ferrite antenna för MW and LW, and a telescope antenna for SW and FM. It also comes with a portable SW antenna (ANT-60), seven meters long. Is this external antenna generally sufficient for SW reception, or should I get a different antenna? If yes, is there a solution that doesn't cost all that much money? I have a copy of the 2009 World Radio TV Handbook, and they are talking about a Wellbrook ALA-1530+ loop antenna, and let me tell you, that one is well past my budget, because it costs $466... I am looking for something a lot cheaper... :-) If it is recommended to replace the ANT-60, that is. PJ Hi PJ, With your location in Sweden, a long wire should pick up a lot of stations unless you are buried deep in a valley. That long wire can be as simple as 10 meters of wire with a clip to attach it to the whip of the Sangean. When I was in Africa last year, that was enough to fill my cheap SW set with signals from everywhere in Africa up into Europe. Toss the wire out a window up into a tree. It is at least a cheap, first attempt to see if you need anything more than that. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC try the superskyhook sloper it works wonders over hear! http://i40.tinypic.com/2ykgg05.jpg mary xmas |
Antenna for shortwave reception
On Dec 25, 1:29*pm, PJ wrote:
Folks, This is the OP speaking. Thanks for all the various tips and tricks! I don't care much for the unpleasant tone between some posters in the rec.radio.shortwave group, but there are still a few glimpses of good information that I can use. I was a very keen DX:er in the seventies, and I used a Swedish vacuum tube radio from 1952, named Nornan LV 1220, with a continous SW band from 15 meters to 120 meters. I still have it, and it still works, but I thought that I'd go a little more modern with the ATS-909... :-) Although I think that the LV 1220 is just as good when it comes to SW reception. I remember that my dream, in the seventies, was to hear the AFAN (American Forces Antarctic Network) SW transmissions here in Sweden. They then used a 1 kW transmitter, and I had heard that someone in the south of Sweden had been able to hear them at some point. Alas, I never did. I am pretty sure that I picked up the carrier wave, but I couldn't hear anything... Bummer... In the 2009 WRTH the AFAN are only listed as an FM station, so I guess that those days are over... PJ PJ you can't get Antartica anymore as Ace says, but there are lots more challenging AFN stations to seek out and have fun with. Sadly the WRTH does not list them conveniently but you can see the full shortwave spread at: http://myafn.dodmedia.osd.mil/ShortWave.aspx You have had lots of blah blah on antenna's, but for your 909 I wouldn't use anything other than the ANT-60 you have, otherwise you will overload it and possibly blow the front end. If you like AM BCB MW DX you might find one of the cheap tuneable loops provided by the big dealers such as Martin Lynch or Universal of some help. Have fun and good listening John Plimmer, Montagu, Western Cape Province, South Africa South 33 d 47 m 32 s, East 20 d 07 m 32 s Icom IC-7700, Icom IC-756 PRO III with MW mods ERGO software Drake SW8. Sangean 803A Sony 7600D, GE SRIII, Redsun RP2100 Antenna's RF Systems DX 1 Pro Mk II, Datong AD-270 Kiwa MW Loop. http://www.dxing.info/about/dxers/plimmer.dx |
Antenna for shortwave reception
I can add a little information that might be helpful.
When considering a receiving antenna, the single thing you need to be concerned about is signal to noise ratio. Unless your antenna is exceptionally poor and/or your receiver exceptionally noisy, making what you receive louder is just a matter of turning up the volume, or adding an audio amplifier if it's not loud enough. But it won't help you hear a station, because it and the noise will get louder in the same proportion. Quite a bit of what you'll read about antennas deals with improving antenna efficiency. That's because it's important when the antenna is used for transmitting. But when you use it for HF receiving, efficiency doesn't matter unless it gets to be bad enough that your receiver's noise becomes greater than the atmospheric noise it's receiving. A quick test for this condition is to disconnect the antenna. If the noise decreases, it means that atmospheric noise is greater than receiver noise -- the usual case -- and efficiency improvements won't help any. They'll just increase both the signal and noise by the same amount, which won't help you a bit in hearing any signals. To improve reception, you have to improve the signal to noise ratio. If there's noise coming from a local source, for example a light dimmer or an arcing power line, you can often reduce the noise by using a horizontal antenna, putting the antenna away from the house and power line conductors, and making sure the feedline is decoupled so it isn't part of the antenna. If noise is mostly coming from a single direction, either local or distant, an antenna with a sharp null such as a small rotatable loop often helps. And, other rotatable antennas with a directional pattern such as Yagis and log periodics, will help if the signal and at least some of the noise are coming from different directions. If a fixed antenna is on the order of a half wave or longer, you might get lucky and have a null pointed at a noise source. The null will usually change direction with frequency, though, so it'll likely only do the trick over a narrow range of frequencies. This can actually be a bad thing, because when somebody gets lucky like this, he'll often tout the antenna as being nearly miraculous in its performance, but no one else will be able to duplicate the results. Enjoy your shortwave listening. It's how I and probably most amateurs got started in this fascinating hobby. Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
Antenna for shortwave reception
Roy Lewallen wrote:
I can add a little information that might be helpful. When considering a receiving antenna, the single thing you need to be concerned about is signal to noise ratio. Unless your antenna is exceptionally poor and/or your receiver exceptionally noisy, making what you receive louder is just a matter of turning up the volume, or adding an audio amplifier if it's not loud enough. But it won't help you hear a station, because it and the noise will get louder in the same proportion. ... Roy Lewallen, W7EL I differ; although, I can understand why Roy would reply in such a simplistic manner ... If the antenna is resonate, matched to its' load, and is not using lossy construction practices--a very magical thing occurs. And, in such a situation, it appears as if a wire runs directly from the transmitter to your antenna. Nicola Tesla first documents this, then others ... However, most give up before they obtain the knowledge and construction practices which produce such antennas--and, indeed, if you wish broadband antennas, no matter how you construct them, they will only produce this performance on a narrow band of frequencies, or perhaps, just a single one ... but, they can be constructed to preform, reasonably well, over a broadband of frequencies or even bands. If you have immense focus, devotion to the construction of antennas, a reasonably astute mind, and the necessary skills, a willingness to construct until you have that "revelation"--the realization of all this awaits you. :-) Warm regards, JS |
Antenna for shortwave reception
On Dec 26, 12:56*pm, Telamon
wrote: In article , *PJ wrote: Folks, This is the OP speaking. Thanks for all the various tips and tricks! I don't care much for the unpleasant tone between some posters in the rec.radio.shortwave group, but there are still a few glimpses of good information that I can use. SNIP edit news group header There are many good people interested in the hobby that post here with information. Sometimes you just have to knock the Trolling idiots over the head with a clue stick. Please don't cross post to rec.radio.amateur.antenna. Normally it would be the right thing to do but that amateur group has a real collection of idiots in it and this news group already has its share of that type. But if you insist on cross posting there I can guarantee you there will be more of what you don't like to see here. -- Telamon Ventura, California PJ - Telamon Is Right :o) i am a trolling idiot and i approve of his post ;-} ~ RHF {sa-prez : trolling idiots-r-us} |
Antenna for shortwave reception
On Tue, 23 Dec 2008 09:46:07 -0800 (PST), PJ
wrote: Folks, I have purchased a Sangean ATS-909 World Receiver. It is equipped with an internal ferrite antenna för MW and LW, and a telescope antenna for SW and FM. It also comes with a portable SW antenna (ANT-60), seven meters long. Is this external antenna generally sufficient for SW reception, or should I get a different antenna? If yes, is there a solution that doesn't cost all that much money? I have a copy of the 2009 World Radio TV Handbook, and they are talking about a Wellbrook ALA-1530+ loop antenna, and let me tell you, that one is well past my budget, because it costs $466... I am looking for something a lot cheaper... :-) If it is recommended to replace the ANT-60, that is. PJ Google "traveling wave" or "Beverage antenna" and read up. They can be built cheaply from wire and are very effective if you have room for one. If you have an interest in receiving stations from a particular direction then lay the antenna out in that direction. A terminated traveling wave antenna is directional and if it's unterminated then it's bidirectional. Good luck with your project. S.T.W. |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur RadioAntennas
On Dec 26, 6:56*pm, John Smith wrote:
Roy Lewallen wrote: I can add a little information that might be helpful. When considering a receiving antenna, the single thing you need to be concerned about is signal to noise ratio. Unless your antenna is exceptionally poor and/or your receiver exceptionally noisy, making what you receive louder is just a matter of turning up the volume, or adding an audio amplifier if it's not loud enough. But it won't help you hear a station, because it and the noise will get louder in the same proportion. |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur RadioAntennas
RHF wrote:
... JS - You are replying like and Amateur Radio Operator [HAM] and are most likely You Are Technically Correct -wrt- Every item that you have pointed out is very valid for Amateur Radio [HAM] Operators. RL - In this instance Knows His Reader and is replying as a Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) to the Original Question : Which was posted by a SWL for Tips on what would be {how to make} a better SWL 'type' of Antenna. -wrt- The SWLer "RL" is Practically Correct. JS - You speak of Antenna 'resonance' while the SWL Antenna is by-design a board-banded "Random" Wire Antenna : Which is often used un-tuned across the Shortwave Radio Bands from 3~30 Mhz. Result : On-average-better-Signal-Levels -and- On-average-lower-Noise-Levels RL - Is very correct that for the Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) : Their Antenna's should give them improved 'better' Signal-to-Noise : So That They Can Hear More [.] two similar hobbies and two different objectives - iane ~ RHF . . Again, in the narrow context which you describe this, you are correct. But, there is no reason to NOT have an antenna of resonate length. A simple motor and a spring loaded real to take up slack will allow you to construct an antenna of variable length and multi-band capability. Indeed, only ones knowledge, "macguiverisms", and patience limits one .... as opposed to purchasing a product which is solely, usually, based on construction costs alone. I think the post, of mine, which you are responding to, with your above response, implied all this--I honestly meant to imply such ... or, in other words, you can only get out what you put in with your efforts, time, materials, knowledge, techniques, etc.; Or, i.e., the more thought, design and good construction practices used, the better the results. While some of us may search for the most simple constructions, others will go towards the most elaborate constructions--if anyone is like myself, complexity grew with understanding, knowledge, patience, etc. And, as I implied, Roy gave an answer which would have sufficed for, perhaps, the majority of SWL-ers... I did not fault it (his response), rather I expanded upon it ... no harm meant here, nor did I intend to "slight" anyone! HONEST! Regards, JS |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur RadioAntennas
On Dec 26, 8:30*pm, John Smith wrote:
RHF wrote: ... JS - You are replying like and Amateur Radio Operator [HAM] and are most likely You Are Technically Correct -wrt- Every item that you have pointed out is very valid for Amateur Radio [HAM] Operators. RL - In this instance Knows His Reader and is replying as a Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) to the Original Question : Which was posted by a SWL for Tips on what would be {how to make} a better SWL 'type' of Antenna. -wrt- The SWLer "RL" is Practically Correct. JS - You speak of Antenna 'resonance' while the SWL Antenna is by-design a board-banded "Random" Wire Antenna : Which is often used un-tuned across the Shortwave Radio Bands from 3~30 Mhz. Result : On-average-better-Signal-Levels -and- On-average-lower-Noise-Levels RL - Is very correct that for the Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) : Their Antenna's should give them improved 'better' Signal-to-Noise : So That They Can Hear More [.] two similar hobbies and two different objectives - iane ~ RHF *. *. Again, in the narrow context which you describe this, you are correct. But, there is no reason to NOT have an antenna of resonate length. *A simple motor and a spring loaded real to take up slack will allow you to construct an antenna of variable length and multi-band capability. Indeed, only ones knowledge, "macguiverisms", and patience limits one ... as opposed to purchasing a product which is solely, usually, based on construction costs alone. I think the post, of mine, which you are responding to, with your above response, implied all this--I honestly meant to imply such ... or, in other words, you can only get out what you put in with your efforts, time, materials, knowledge, techniques, etc.; Or, i.e., the more thought, design and good construction practices used, the better the results. While some of us may search for the most simple constructions, others will go towards the most elaborate constructions--if anyone is like myself, complexity grew with understanding, knowledge, patience, etc. And, as I implied, Roy gave an answer which would have sufficed for, perhaps, the majority of SWL-ers... I did not fault it (his response), rather I expanded upon it ... no harm meant here, nor did I intend to "slight" anyone! *HONEST! Regards, JS JS, Alas i am but a simple shortwave LISTENER I simply LISTEN and 'enjoy' what I LISTEN too Beyond that; when i LISTEN everything else is so much technical 'noise' JS - Enjoy "The Craft" of BEING an Amateur "Ham" Radio Operator -and- I am sure that you are a lot more . . . and rightly well deserved too. js - but alas i remain a simple shortwave listener who simply enjoys listening to the radio; cause practically speaking; that is what i do - - - respectfully ~ RHF |
Antenna for shortwave reception
On Dec 23, 8:06*pm, SC Dxing wrote:
PJ, I've discovered there is no best antenna for everyone for shortwave listening. Ignore the trolls here, start off with your wire antenna, then experiment if you wish. I've tried a few things over the past few weeks and for me, just running a wire along the ground about 60 feet works best for me. I guess the only certain thing is that an antenna that runs outside will work better than an inside antenna. If you can't run one outside, try to put it by a window or up high in your house/apartment. Experimenting is part of the fun, just google around, play around, and have hours of fun on your new radio. I only in the last few weeks have rediscovered listening to SW radio. Happy listening. SC, Did you inductively couple the antenna to your whip? If you didn't you will notice a marked improvement if you do it that way. Just in case you don't know (I think I posted this already) grab you some wire (I use 11 or 12 gauge) and tightly wrap five-seven turns around your whip and cut the rest off. Pull about an inch of the plastic off and clip onto that. At one time I was doing the "exact" thing you are except I think my stretch of wire was 70ft. But I picking up a lot rf here and there, pretty high noise floor on some bands. When I coupled it that way the noise floor dropped to nothing. |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur RadioAntennas
RHF wrote:
... js - but alas i remain a simple shortwave listener who simply enjoys listening to the radio; cause practically speaking; that is what i do - - - respectfully ~ RHF . Quit peeing on my leg ... Brother, I enjoy having a good time, a good drink and the company of a good woman as well as anyone; And, furthermore, I am here because I enjoy a good antenna as well as anyone else. I am here because some know much more than me, can explain it in a manner which I can absorb (Cecil is but one example), and I expect there is much more for us ALL to learn, indeed ... I ain't here to lecture you ... I ain't here to be a ham ... I ain't here to play the game of "one-up-man-ship"; I am here to catch what I missed "the-first-time-around"--end-of-story. But now, a good argument, a good debate, a good "theory-session" ... count me in! Sit back, and pick on the next guy in line ... ;-) Regards, JS |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur RadioAntennas
RHF wrote:
... - - - respectfully ~ RHF . But, can I ask you one question?; You do pull on your pants one leg at a time, right? wink I mean, only politicians, as far as I know, claim different! LOL Regards, JS |
Antenna for shortwave reception
On Dec 23, 9:46*am, PJ wrote:
Folks, I have purchased a Sangean ATS-909 World Receiver. It is equipped with an internal ferrite antenna för MW and LW, and a telescope antenna for SW and FM. It also comes with a portable SW antenna (ANT-60), seven meters long. Is this external antenna generally sufficient for SW reception, or should I get a different antenna? If yes, is there a solution that doesn't cost all that much money? I have a copy of the 2009 World Radio TV Handbook, and they are talking about a Wellbrook ALA-1530+ loop antenna, and let me tell you, that one is well past my budget, because it costs $466... I am looking for something a lot cheaper... :-) If it is recommended to replace the ANT-60, that is. PJ http://www.wellbrook.uk.com/ALA100b.html With a bit of hacking, the Wellbrook ALA 100 is as good as any of the shortwave antennas they sell. It is just the amplifier. You have to roll your own loop. The ALA100 is the lowest cost welbrook. At the current exchange rate, the ala100 is a over $200. I have made a few loops with this amp. I have a 2ftx2ft out of copper pipe for direction finding. I have 4ft x 6ft copper pipe for regular use. It's really stupid big and will eventually be reduced to the original 4ftx4ft. I have a few portable designs that are around 40ft worth of wire. The wellbrook loops are just amazing. All that said, the ATS909 probably can't handle that much signal. It would make sense to use one with a portable shortwave radio. |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur RadioAntennas
John Smith wrote:
RHF wrote: ... js - but alas i remain a simple shortwave listener who simply enjoys listening to the radio; cause practically speaking; that is what i do - - - respectfully ~ RHF . Quit peeing on my leg ... Brother, I enjoy having a good time, a good drink and the company of a good woman as well as anyone; And, furthermore, I am here because I enjoy a good antenna as well as anyone else. I am here because some know much more than me, can explain it in a manner which I can absorb (Cecil is but one example), and I expect there is much more for us ALL to learn, indeed ... I ain't here to lecture you ... I ain't here to be a ham ... I ain't here to play the game of "one-up-man-ship"; I am here to catch what I missed "the-first-time-around"--end-of-story. But now, a good argument, a good debate, a good "theory-session" ... count me in! Sit back, and pick on the next guy in line ... ;-) Regards, JS A random wire (e.g. inverted L) transmits nicely if you use a tuner at the feed point. |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur RadioAntennas
John Smith wrote:
RHF wrote: ... - - - respectfully ~ RHF . But, can I ask you one question?; You do pull on your pants one leg at a time, right? wink I mean, only politicians, as far as I know, claim different! LOL Regards, JS I don't recognize "politician" as being a monolithic culture. There are decent ones and there are many more ****-heads, but that holds true for society in general. |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur Radio Antennas
Again, in the narrow context which you describe this, you are correct. But, there is no reason to NOT have an antenna of resonate length. A simple motor and a spring loaded real to take up slack will allow you to construct an antenna of variable length and multi-band capability. Indeed, only ones knowledge, "macguiverisms", and patience limits one ... as opposed to purchasing a product which is solely, usually, based on construction costs alone. I think the post, of mine, which you are responding to, with your above response, implied all this--I honestly meant to imply such ... or, in other words, you can only get out what you put in with your efforts, time, materials, knowledge, techniques, etc.; Or, i.e., the more thought, design and good construction practices used, the better the results. While some of us may search for the most simple constructions, others will go towards the most elaborate constructions--if anyone is like myself, complexity grew with understanding, knowledge, patience, etc. And, as I implied, Roy gave an answer which would have sufficed for, perhaps, the majority of SWL-ers... I did not fault it (his response), rather I expanded upon it ... no harm meant here, nor did I intend to "slight" anyone! HONEST! Regards, JS Actually there is no reason TO have a resonant length antenna if you can tune it electrically. After all, you may want to tune around some. I can tell you it is a pain to have to go out and physically make adjustments for any frequency excursion. There are many nonresonant length antennas that outperform the resonant length. The 5/8 wave vertical comes to mind. A long-wire provides a larger capture area. Then there are phased arrays that reinforce. Look up the HAARP project and see how they made a very large array and were able to electrically steer the pattern. Cool! The more you know, the cheaper it gets, and the more you giggle when it works. The only problem is you get hooked and want to do so much more. |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur RadioAntennas
JB wrote:
Actually there is no reason TO have a resonant length antenna if you can tune it electrically. Actually, tuning it "electrically" *is* tuning the antenna *system* to resonance. When I vary my ladder-line length to achieve system resonance, I am using my feedline as a series tuning section. When one achieves a Z0-match with a tuner or by other means, one is tuning the antenna system to resonance which, in a near-lossless system, results in near-conjugate match and near-maximum power transfer in either direction (assuming the receiver input impedance equals the Z0-match impedance). -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur RadioAntennas
On Dec 27, 7:03*am, Dave wrote:
John Smith wrote: RHF wrote: ... js - but alas i remain a simple shortwave listener who simply enjoys listening to the radio; cause practically speaking; that is what i do - - - respectfully ~ RHF *. Quit peeing on my leg ... Brother, I enjoy having a good time, a good drink and the company of a good woman as well as anyone; *And, furthermore, I am here because I enjoy a good antenna as well as anyone else. I am here because some know much more than me, can explain it in a manner which I can absorb (Cecil is but one example), and I expect there is much more for us ALL to learn, indeed ... I ain't here to lecture you ... I ain't here to be a ham ... I ain't here to play the game of "one-up-man-ship"; *I am here to catch what I missed "the-first-time-around"--end-of-story. But now, a good argument, a good debate, a good "theory-session" ... count me in! Sit back, and pick on the next guy in line ... *;-) Regards, JS - A random wire (e.g. inverted L) transmits nicely - if you use a tuner at the feed point. Dave, IIRC a good Amateur Radio 1/4 WL Vertical-Up-Leg by 1/4 WL Horizontal-Out-Arm {Inverted "L" Antenna requires very little Tuning and performs very well near and far on the HF Band that it is 'cut' to use on. Using a direct-connect or 1:1 UnUn at the Feed-Point * Half-Wave Inverted "L" Antenna : 1/4 WL + 1/4 WL http://www.bloomington.in.us/~wh2t/invertedl.html http://www.antennex.com/preview/archive3/ltv.htm * Yes a "Tuner" can help on other bands. Where-as the more common Shortwave Listener (SWL) type of {Random Wire} Inverted "L" Antenna is un-equal and usually has a shorter Vertical-Up-Leg and a longer Horizontal-Out-Arm of at least 1V-to-2H and often 1V-to-3H or more. Using a 9:1 Matching Transformer and Ground Rod at the Feed-Point which is at the base of the Vertical-Up-Leg. * Again the Wellbrook Drawing http://www.wellbrook.uk.com/images/antright.gif http://www.wellbrook.uk.com/longwire.html as usual it's the 'l' if i know - iane ~ RHF |
Antenna for shortwave reception
On Dec 26, 9:12 pm, RHF wrote:
Please don't cross post to rec.radio.amateur.antenna. Normally it would be the right thing to do but that amateur group has a real collection of idiots in it and this news group already has its share of that type. But if you insist on cross posting there I can guarantee you there will be more of what you don't like to see here. -- Telamon Ventura, California PJ - Telamon Is Right :o) No he's not. He's a bigger horses ass than nearly anyone on rraa.. :/ And that's a fact. Only "John Smith" might give him a run for his money in that dept. :/ But I'm not a whiner like Telamon, and try to tell people what groups to use, or avoid. They have horses asses of some kind on all the groups. I just ignore *them*. Not the whole group. It's like "John Smith". I think he's a horses ass, but I don't try to tell him where to go, or others to avoid him. I just lets the chips fall where they may. Most people don't need me to help them decide who is a horses ass, and who is not. It becomes fairly obvious with the passage of time. :/ i am a trolling idiot and i approve of his post ;-} ~ RHF {sa-prez : trolling idiots-r-us} I won't argue... . IMHO the Rec.Radio.Amateur.Antenna people are good people -but- They 'focus' on two disciplines : Power Output Handling -and- Ability To Hear [Cause They Both Transmit and Listen] -while- The Shortwave Radio Listeners (SWL) is also 'focus' on two disciplines : Improved Signal plus Noise Reduction -aka- Better Signal-to-Noise (S/N) Ratio [Cause They "Only' Listen and Do Not Transmit] This is purely cheap ground luncheon loaf... IE: bologna Radio reception is radio reception. It does not matter if one is a ham, or SWL, or whatever. The rules do not change due to the type of service being received. I almost never worry about power handling. Most of my antennas will take way more power than I would ever use. It's rarely even a consideration. What is "ability to hear"? It's basically the same thing as S/N ratio. In this regard, there is no difference what type of service is received, S/N ratio is equally important. Read these Posts here on Rec.Radio.Shortwave about the Low Noise Shortwave Radio Antenna Concepts that were 'popularized; . Here are the Three Key Posts : . # 1 - SWL Longwire -by- John Doty * Actually, a fixed matching transformer can dramatically reduce the wild swings in antenna efficiency that a coax fed wire antenna exhibits. But! that will rarely effect the S/N ratio on the shortwave bands. Like Roy said, if you can disconnect the antenna, and the background noise noticeably drops , you have plenty of signal. Adding a better match will rarely increase the S/N ratio on HF, because the desired signal and the undesired noise increase at an equal level. You have pumped up the S meter readings, but you have not improved the actual S/N ratio. When I use my large multi band dipoles for SW reception on 49 meters, do you think I bother with a tuner? Nope.. Total waste of time being I already have way more signal than I would ever need even if looking into a large mismatch. . # 2 - Low Noise Antenna Connection -by- J * The difference between a mediocre antenna system and a great antenna system isn't the antenna itself: it's the way you feed signals from the antenna to the receiver. * The real trick with a shortwave receiving antenna system is to keep your receiver from picking up noise from all the electrical and electronic gadgets you and your neighbors have. I can't argue with this. But trust me, hams are no different than SWL's when it comes to trying to reduce local noise pickup. This is just common sense, and not a practice only used by SWL's. :/ . # 3 - Grounding Is Key To Good Reception Now, this part here is just plain ole horse manure. Grounding is not a "key" to good reception, unless you are using an antenna that requires a ground connection in order to complete the antenna. Or the grounding is to further decouple the feed line from the antenna. But you don't require a ground to decouple a feed line. It's just one method commonly used with random length antennas fed with a coax feed line. None of my wire antennas require a ground connection as they are complete antennas unto themselves. Ground can actually be a source of noise in many cases. To sum, some make a mountain out of a molehill. :/ Richard Clarks simple solution of just adding more wire to the whip on the radio is likely to work just as well as anything proposed so far. If local noise is a problem, then he might consider feeding an outside wire with a decoupled feedline. Anything further than that is likely S meter pumping overkill. |
Antenna for shortwave reception
On Dec 27, 10:05*am, wrote:
On Dec 26, 9:12 pm, RHF wrote: Please don't cross post to rec.radio.amateur.antenna. Normally it would be the right thing to do but that amateur group has a real collection of idiots in it and this news group already has its share of that type. But if you insist on cross posting there I can guarantee you there will be more of what you don't like to see here. -- Telamon Ventura, California PJ - Telamon Is Right :o) No he's not. He's a bigger horses ass than nearly anyone on rraa.. * :/ And that's a fact. Only "John Smith" might give him a run for his money in that dept. * :/ But I'm not a whiner like Telamon, and try to tell people what groups to use, or avoid. They have horses asses of some kind on all the groups. I just ignore *them*. Not the whole group. It's like "John Smith". I think he's a horses ass, but I don't try to tell him where to go, or others to avoid him. I just lets the chips fall where they may. Most people don't need me to help them decide who is a horses ass, and who is not. It becomes fairly obvious with the passage of time. :/ i am a trolling idiot and i approve of his post ;-} ~ RHF {sa-prez : trolling idiots-r-us} I won't argue... *. IMHO the Rec.Radio.Amateur.Antenna people are good people -but- They 'focus' on two disciplines : Power Output Handling -and- Ability To Hear [Cause They Both Transmit and Listen] -while- The Shortwave Radio Listeners (SWL) is also 'focus' on two disciplines : Improved Signal plus Noise Reduction -aka- Better Signal-to-Noise (S/N) Ratio [Cause They "Only' Listen and Do Not Transmit] This is purely cheap ground luncheon loaf... IE: bologna Radio reception is radio reception. It does not matter if one is a ham, or SWL, or whatever. The rules do not change due to the type of service being received. I almost never worry about power handling. Most of my antennas will take way more power than I would ever use. It's rarely even a consideration. What is "ability to hear"? *It's basically the same thing as S/N ratio. In this regard, there is no difference what type of service is received, S/N ratio is equally important. Read these Posts here on Rec.Radio.Shortwave about the Low Noise Shortwave Radio Antenna Concepts that were 'popularized; *. Here are the Three Key Posts : *. # 1 - SWL Longwire -by- John Doty * Actually, a fixed matching transformer can dramatically reduce the wild swings in antenna efficiency that a coax fed wire antenna exhibits. But! that will rarely effect the S/N ratio on the shortwave bands. Like Roy said, if you can disconnect the antenna, and the background noise noticeably drops , you have plenty of signal. Adding a better match will rarely increase the S/N ratio on HF, because the desired signal and the undesired noise increase at an equal level. You have pumped up the S meter readings, but you have not improved the actual S/N ratio. When I use my large multi band dipoles for SW reception on 49 meters, do you think I bother with a tuner? Nope.. Total waste of time being I already have way more signal than I would ever need even if looking into a large mismatch. *. # 2 - Low Noise Antenna Connection -by- J * The difference between a mediocre antenna system and a great antenna system isn't the antenna itself: it's the way you feed signals from the antenna to the receiver. * The real trick with a shortwave receiving antenna system is to keep your receiver from picking up noise from all the electrical and electronic gadgets you and your neighbors have. I can't argue with this. But trust me, hams are no different than SWL's when it comes to trying to reduce local noise pickup. This is just common sense, and not a practice only used by SWL's. * :/ *. # 3 - Grounding Is Key To Good Reception Now, this part here is just plain ole horse manure. Grounding is not a "key" to good reception, unless you are using an antenna that requires a ground connection in order to complete the antenna. Or the grounding is to further decouple the feed line from the antenna. *But you don't require a ground to decouple a feed line. It's just one method commonly used with random length antennas fed with a coax feed line. None of my wire antennas require a ground connection as they are complete antennas unto themselves. Ground can actually be a source of noise in many cases. To sum, some make a mountain out of a molehill. :/ Richard Clarks simple solution of just adding more wire to the whip on the radio is likely to work just as well as anything proposed so far. If local noise is a problem, then he might consider feeding an outside wire with a decoupled feedline. Anything further than that is likely S meter pumping overkill. "N", Don't know too many 'Hams' would would take 50 Feet of common Speaker Wire and tie-a-knot at 30 Feet and then split the two Wires in the remaining 20 Feet and use the thing as a "Stealth" Dipole Antenna with their Transmitter -but- a Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) can do that and have a very practical SWL Antenna to use with many 'portable' AM&FM Shortwave Radios. 50-Ft. 24-Gauge Clear 2-Conductor Speaker Wire RadioShack Catalog # 278-1301 http://www.radioshack.com/product/in...ductId=2102499 "n" - practically speaking {in practice} there is a difference between between hams and swls ~ RHF |
Antenna for shortwave reception
On Dec 27, 12:53*pm, RHF wrote:
"N", Don't know too many 'Hams' would would take 50 Feet of common Speaker Wire and tie-a-knot at 30 Feet and then split the two Wires in the remaining 20 Feet and use the thing as a "Stealth" Dipole Antenna with their Transmitter -but- a Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) can do that and have a very practical SWL Antenna to use with many 'portable' AM&FM Shortwave Radios. Well, sure, but what does transmitting have to do with anything? We are not talking about transmitting. We are talking about receiving, "or at least I am", and the rules do not change when you vary the frequency a few mhz. And there are more than one ways to skin a cat with a given piece of wire. If I had a portable that normally used a whip antenna for SW, I would be much more likely to take that zip cord and split it totally apart to make a single 100 ft wire. I would simply clip it onto the whip. I bet my version would be the better performer of the two, low bands for sure. But this has nothing to do with what I'm listening to. If I'm listening on a ham rig, and I'm not transmitting, I'm a SWL the same as anyone else. :/ And most certainly so if I'm listening to a broadcast band like 31m, or whatever. Do you think I play by different rules than you if we are both listening to 31m at the same time? I hope not... :/ Sure, you can make a quite decent and usable SWL antenna from nothing but a piece of wire, or zip cord. But that is not a requirement to be a ®real SWL. How would you like to try listening to 19m DX on my tri-band yagi, which is still close enough to 20m, to give pretty danged good performance and some F/B? With that, why would I want to use a zip cord antenna? It boggles the mind... :/ And I'm talking receive, not transmit. We'll pretend the mike and keyer have been superglued to a tango- uniform status. But I guess being I'd rather use my full size yagi and have a bit of F/B ratio, which improves S/N ratio, which is the whole purpose of this topic, I'm not a ®real SWL.. Chortle.. :/ You two guys kill me... You really do. 50-Ft. 24-Gauge Clear 2-Conductor Speaker Wire RadioShack Catalog # 278-1301http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2102499 Uh.. I know where to buy wire.. :/ "n" - practically speaking {in practice} there is a difference between between hams and swls ~ RHF No, there isn't. Not when it comes to receiving. To propose otherwise is just ludicrous. I listen to all the same bands you do at some time or another. I was a rabid SWL when I was in jr. high school. That was nearly 40 years ago. I started DXing AM-BC when I was 8 years old and got my first mighty six transister radio for my birthday. It's the main reason I'm a ham now. Just a natural progression... In other words, I might have been born yesterday, but not last night. :/ |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur RadioAntennas
JB wrote:
... Actually there is no reason TO have a resonant length antenna if you can tune it electrically. After all, you may want to tune around some. I can tell you it is a pain to have to go out and physically make adjustments for any frequency excursion. There are many nonresonant length antennas that outperform the resonant length. The 5/8 wave vertical comes to mind. A long-wire provides a larger capture area. Then there are phased arrays that reinforce. Look up the HAARP project and see how they made a very large array and were able to electrically steer the pattern. Cool! The more you know, the cheaper it gets, and the more you giggle when it works. The only problem is you get hooked and want to do so much more. Actually, this is a total misconception. Download EZNEC or MMANA-GAL. Plugin the figures for a 1/4 wave physical antenna "loaded" to 1/2 wave, examine the radiation pattern ... Now, do the same for a full 1/2 wave physical length antenna and examine the pattern ... But then, I am sure you suspected, you can't take a 2 ft. antenna and electrically resonate it to some other physical length, and have it preform as the full physical length version ... if this were possible, everyone would have little one inch antennas on their rigs ... Regards, JS |
Antenna for shortwave reception
RHF wrote:
... "n" - practically speaking {in practice} there is a difference between between hams and swls ~ RHF . . Simply a pipe dream ... The same antenna which transmits the MOST EFFICIENT signal possible, will also receive the signal the MOST EFFICIENTLY (given measuring parameters remain the same for both modes, i.e., T/R) ... smaller gauge components with far less power ratings can be used for receiving antennas--that is the most important difference, and actually, the only important one(s.) However, I can see how some would come the the conclusion(s) you have. In cheap receivers, you really don't know what ohm impedance the antenna jack REALLY is. It may say 50 ohms and be 100, 200 ... 500 etc. Least, that has been my experience ... when you get into professional gear, costing thousands, they can take the time and aim for accuracy. Regards, JS |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur Radio Antennas
In article ,
Cecil Moore wrote: JB wrote: Actually there is no reason TO have a resonant length antenna if you can tune it electrically. Actually, tuning it "electrically" *is* tuning the antenna *system* to resonance. When I vary my ladder-line length to achieve system resonance, I am using my feedline as a series tuning section. When one achieves a Z0-match with a tuner or by other means, one is tuning the antenna system to resonance which, in a near-lossless system, results in near-conjugate match and near-maximum power transfer in either direction (assuming the receiver input impedance equals the Z0-match impedance). This ever so helpful to the OP receiving antenna problem. This was precipitated by the news group clown RHF who changed the subject from "Antenna for shortwave reception" to the current " Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur Radio Antennas" Good job Trolling jackass RHF. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur RadioAntennas
Dave wrote:
... A random wire (e.g. inverted L) transmits nicely if you use a tuner at the feed point. Nicely is rather a broad term ... And, if I am running 1KW+, or even multi-kilowatts, and the guy on the other end is doing the same--we can communicate "nicely" on very poor antennas ... However, if I am running 5 watts, and the other guy is also, a properly constructed antenna which has been designed around efficiency and most desirable radiation pattern, along with having a correct impedance and is matched EXACTLY to the equipment, and such is done without a lossy "matchbox" or inefficient matching method--these would be of paramount importance. Physics, as much as math, is an EXACT science ... antennas are NOT in realm of "art" (gray areas, open to interpretation, is a matter of personal opinion, etc.), there is but one "best" antenna for any given distance, terrain, pattern, etc. Regards, JS |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur RadioAntennas
Billy Burpelson wrote:
... Say what? He said he "ain't here to be a ham", so why would he want to transmit? Well, consider me a "different type of ham." In that, I always construct my antennas to receive the best signal for the application at hand, ALWAYS--transmitting is only a secondary consideration. As, I have never found an antenna which has been found to receive the most efficiently fail to do so in xmit mode. Given both xmitter and receiver have the same input impedances ... I do, frequently, see hams adjust the antenna, and its' type, for the xmitter--and the best readings which can be obtained in that mode. I pay far more attention to how the antenna receives ... I can always crank up power on this end, should I ever find it necessary--I don't know what the guys capabilities on the other end is/are ... Regards, JS |
Antenna for shortwave reception
On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 12:27:09 -0800, John Smith
wrote: The same antenna which transmits the MOST EFFICIENT signal possible, will also receive the signal the MOST EFFICIENTLY If that were true then the BIG boys on 160m would have no need for tall vertical transmitting antennas and traveling wave (Beverage) receive antennas. They could just use one or the other for both transmitting and receiving, but they don't. That's because one is better for transmitting and one is better for receiving. S.T.W. |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur RadioAntennas
RHF wrote:
Dave, IIRC a good Amateur Radio 1/4 WL Vertical-Up-Leg by 1/4 WL Horizontal-Out-Arm {Inverted "L" Antenna requires very little Tuning and performs very well near and far on the HF Band that it is 'cut' to use on. Using a direct-connect or 1:1 UnUn at the Feed-Point * Half-Wave Inverted "L" Antenna : 1/4 WL + 1/4 WL Where-as the more common Shortwave Listener (SWL) type of {Random Wire} Inverted "L" Antenna is un-equal and usually has a shorter Vertical-Up-Leg and a longer Horizontal-Out-Arm of at least 1V-to-2H and often 1V-to-3H or more. Using a 9:1 Matching Transformer and Ground Rod at the Feed-Point which is at the base of the Vertical-Up-Leg. "Random" implies otherwise. Instead of a 9:1 UnUn, imagine one of these at the feed point: http://www.mfjenterprises.com/Produc...ductid=MFJ-927 I enjoy playing with these kind of things. So I got a license to transmit. Some call that "elitist", I call it self-indulgent. |
Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur RadioAntennas
John Smith wrote:
Dave wrote: ... A random wire (e.g. inverted L) transmits nicely if you use a tuner at the feed point. Nicely is rather a broad term ... And, if I am running 1KW+, or even multi-kilowatts, and the guy on the other end is doing the same--we can communicate "nicely" on very poor antennas ... However, if I am running 5 watts, and the other guy is also, a properly constructed antenna which has been designed around efficiency and most desirable radiation pattern, along with having a correct impedance and is matched EXACTLY to the equipment, and such is done without a lossy "matchbox" or inefficient matching method--these would be of paramount importance. Physics, as much as math, is an EXACT science ... antennas are NOT in realm of "art" (gray areas, open to interpretation, is a matter of personal opinion, etc.), there is but one "best" antenna for any given distance, terrain, pattern, etc. Regards, JS |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:52 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com