John Gilmer wrote:
"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 1 Oct 2009 16:58:13 -0400, "John Gilmer"
wrote:


What makes you ask?
Because I want to get some help in deciding whether to buy one or not.

Buy a fractal antenna? What a novel concept. Do you have an example?

I saw on in a Big Box store (Target or Wally World). It said "Patented
Technology."

I was thinking of something for use in a high rise condo now vacent. When
I lived there years ago it was possible to get about 10 or so TV stations
with whatever rabbit ears that came with the TV.

I have been around for awhile. I rememble a "miracle" TV antenna that was
just a weight covered with plastic, for example. So I am wondering
whether there is something that works like a "miracle" or are rabbit ears
the state of the art for a antenna. Trouble is that with flat screen TVs,
there isn't any place to put rabbit ears!


If you're close, try the rabbit ears. If not, try a small yagi. Fractal
antennas are probably not the solution for you. One might work, but high
performance is not what they are about. They are about large bandwidth
in a small space. But it's the definition of small space that is the issue.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 04:03:17 -0400, "John Gilmer"
wrote:


"Richard Clark" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 1 Oct 2009 16:58:13 -0400, "John Gilmer"
wrote:



What makes you ask?

Because I want to get some help in deciding whether to buy one or not.


Buy a fractal antenna? What a novel concept. Do you have an example?

I saw on in a Big Box store (Target or Wally World). It said "Patented
Technology."

Hardly a recommendation when the technology is a corriolis force
applied left hand threaded (gaussian) screw holding the maker's plaque
to the merchandise.

I was thinking of something for use in a high rise condo now vacent. When
I lived there years ago it was possible to get about 10 or so TV stations
with whatever rabbit ears that came with the TV.


I have been around for awhile. I rememble a "miracle" TV antenna that was
just a weight covered with plastic, for example. So I am wondering
whether there is something that works like a "miracle" or are rabbit ears
the state of the art for a antenna. Trouble is that with flat screen TVs,
there isn't any place to put rabbit ears!

Calling it fractal won't add a horizontal surface to a flat screen to
sit the antenna on; and it won't remove the necessity of turning the
antenna 90 degrees to catch the signal and poking you in the eye with
"patented technology."

Take a conventional rabbit ears antenna, lay it in the driveway, drive
over it for the next of the week; and DON'T report here how well your
fractal works when you put it up or you might get a cease-and-desist
notice from a lawyer representing a recent Nova whore.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Fri, 02 Oct 2009 10:41:46 -0400, Michael Coslo
wrote:

Myth number two (or was it one?):

They are about large bandwidth
in a small space.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Fri, 02 Oct 2009 10:34:45 -0400, Michael Coslo
wrote:

"****bird"

Awwww, a term of endearment that has brought tears to my eyes.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Sep 29, 11:46*pm, "John Gilmer" wrote:
Hi:

A month or so ago I say a PBS piece on fractals. * The piece claimed that
the "technology" is used to make the antennas for cell phones.

Have any amateurs used "fractal technology" to form their antennas?

Also, I note that "they" market HDTV antennas that are about the size of a
book. * Do these things work? *What's inside them?

Yours,

JLG

I consider any balanced symmetrical antenna a fractal.
Even a dipole.
What many consider as a fractal antenna, I consider a linear
loaded antenna using "creative" linear loading.
Is creative linear loading superior to the usual linear loading
one might encounter? No one has ever proven this to be the
case.

They even held contests on this group to see who could
build the best "fractal" antenna. It was shown that even
random designs performed just as well or better than
the designs offered by the local fractal guru at that time.

Fractal antennas are a viable antenna to use in tight
spaces, but no one has ever proven that a fractal design
is any better than a random linear loading design.
Not even once that I can think of.

I could cover my eyeballs, and scribble out a symmetrical
design on a piece of paper, and most likely it would
perform just as well as a "guru" offered fractal design.
A few here have proven this to be the case.
What fractal antennas are really good for is when you
have DOD and government contracts that require very
small antennas, and need something which seems
"special" in order to win these contracts.
It doesn't really matter if the antennas are superior to
random design linear loading. All that matters is that
the ones that sign checks believe it to be the case.
Kind of like the government spending $342.95 for a
hammer. It doesn't matter that the expensive hammer
is no better than one you can buy at Home Depot for
a fraction of that price. The hype overrules the reality,
and clouds the minds of those that sign checks.
Needless to say, the ones that sign checks don't have
a clue whether fractal antennas are worth the money or
not. They could care less. They see it as redistributing
wealth. :/
To me it matters not. I use manly full sized antennas,
and I'll leave the little fractals to ones that want inferior
performance.
Heck, if I could sell boatloads of inferior antennas for
boatloads of money, I could probably live with inferior
antennas too. :/
I'd be laughing too hard on my way to the bank to
worry about having a decent antenna for my radios.
Or HDTV.. Another groaner for me. HDTV antennas..
What in the wide wide world of sports is an HDTV
antenna? Do digital signals follow different rules than
analog signals? Groan... Just another example of
getting people to write checks for something someone
claims as "special" when it's not.

On Oct 2, 1:18*pm, wrote:
On Sep 29, 11:46*pm, "John Gilmer" wrote:

Hi:

A month or so ago I say a PBS piece on fractals. * The piece claimed that
the "technology" is used to make the antennas for cell phones.

Have any amateurs used "fractal technology" to form their antennas?

Also, I note that "they" market HDTV antennas that are about the size of a
book. * Do these things work? *What's inside them?

Yours,

JLG

I consider any balanced symmetrical antenna a fractal.
Even a dipole.
What many consider as a fractal antenna, I consider a linear
loaded antenna using "creative" linear loading.
Is creative linear loading superior to the usual linear loading
one might encounter? No one has ever proven this to be the
case.

They even held contests on this group to see who could
build the best "fractal" antenna. It was shown that even
random designs performed just as well or better than
the designs offered by the local fractal guru at that time.

Fractal antennas are a viable antenna to use in tight
spaces, but no one has ever proven that a fractal design
is any better than a random linear loading design.
Not even once that I can think of.

I could cover my eyeballs, and scribble out a symmetrical
design on a piece of paper, and most likely it would
perform just as well as a "guru" offered fractal design.
A few here have proven this to be the case.
What fractal antennas are really good for is when you
have DOD and government contracts that require very
small antennas, and need something which seems
"special" in order to win these contracts.
It doesn't really matter if the antennas are superior to
random design linear loading. All that matters is that
the ones that sign checks believe it to be the case.
Kind of like the government spending $342.95 for a
hammer. It doesn't matter that the expensive hammer
is no better than one you can buy at Home Depot for
a fraction of that price. The hype overrules the reality,
and clouds the minds of those that sign checks.
Needless to say, the ones that sign checks don't have
a clue whether fractal antennas are worth the money or
not. They could care less. They see it as redistributing
wealth. :/
To me it matters not. I use manly full sized antennas,
and I'll leave the little fractals to ones that want inferior
performance.
Heck, if I could sell boatloads of inferior antennas for
boatloads of money, I could probably live with inferior
antennas too. *:/
I'd be laughing too hard on my way to the bank to
worry about having a decent antenna for my radios.
Or HDTV.. Another groaner for me. HDTV antennas..
What in the wide wide world of sports is an HDTV
antenna? Do digital signals follow different rules than
analog signals? Groan... Just another example of
getting people to write checks for something someone
claims as "special" when it's not. *

I remember when color TV was the rage and color was added to the name
on all the TV antennas. Sometimes there was actually a stick on
"color" label on the box.

JImmie

On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 00:46:28 -0400, "John Gilmer"
wrote:


Also, I note that "they" market HDTV antennas that are about the size of a
book. Do these things work? What's inside them?

One thing that has not been mentioned is most of the small HDTV
antennas (at least the ones I have seen) include an RF amplifier. W/o
the amplifier these antennas' performance is abysmal.

What in the wide wide world of sports is an HDTV antenna? Do
digital signals follow different rules than analog signals? Groan...
Just another example of getting people to write checks for something
someone claims as "special" when it's not.

I remember seeing one at CES a few years ago. An HDTV antenna, I laughed,
mad at me for being too practicaal to exploit the idiot market, and
remembered how in the late 60's there were suddenly "color" TV antennas.
Gold anodized to make
em look different.

Same thing. Congratulate the guy making hte money with it.

GeorgeC

On Fri, 02 Oct 2009 16:29:19 -0400, Registered User wrote:

On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 00:46:28 -0400, "John Gilmer"
wrote:


Also, I note that "they" market HDTV antennas that are about the size of
a book. Do these things work? What's inside them?

One thing that has not been mentioned is most of the small HDTV antennas
(at least the ones I have seen) include an RF amplifier. W/o the
amplifier these antennas' performance is abysmal.

There's an interesting twist. We're finding that these amplified gizmo's
are creating problems. Too much signal for the amplifier, actually
degrading performance. And they amplify the local noise, which is much of
the real issue, Taiwan wall-wart supplies, etc...

And they amplify FM. Combine the right two FM's and you can wipe out
reception to a VHF high band TV.

It is amazing how mis informed so many people are.

Yeah, just ask the guy at Radio Shack. 50 years too late for that one to
have a chance.

GeorgeC

There's an interesting twist. We're finding that these amplified gizmo's
are creating problems. Too much signal for the amplifier, actually
degrading performance. And they amplify the local noise, which is much of
the real issue, Taiwan wall-wart supplies, etc...

We are getting a little "thread drift" here but ...

When the shift to HDTV came we suddenly found that we couldn't get reliable
service for most of the channels we were used to. We live in a semi-rural
place and it's over 50 miles (as the crow flies) to the nearest broadcast TV
antenna.

A neighbor suggested the antenna mounted amplifier (I already had a
"distribution amplifier" in the basement) and it fixed us up.