Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Aug 10, 8:23*am, Art Unwin wrote:
What stands out for me is the audio improvement. Only very high Q antennas should noticeably effect audio. Comparing a dipole to say a turnstile, you should notice no real difference at all. I've used turnstiles on 75 and 40 meters for years. They work very well, but audio improvement is not one of the usual features noted. I prefer a turnstile over a dipole on the low bands if I have my choice. They seem slightly more efficient overall, but I've never done any accurate testing. They also tend to fill in the nulls off the ends that a dipole can show. I've heard that running a circular polarized antenna like the turnstile on HF, only shows circular polarization at the higher angles. Which is what I'm usually using when working NVIS on the lower bands. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Circular polarization... does it have to be synchronous?? | Antenna | |||
Quad and circular polarization | Antenna | |||
Mixing high side versus low side and (f1 - f2) versus (f1 + f2) | Homebrew | |||
Circular vs. Linear and Dipole vs. Loop. Thoughts? | Antenna | |||
Circular V.S. Vertical antenna polarization ! | Broadcasting |