Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() The gain of the 15 foot noise reducing vertical is about -15 dB reference: http://www.kongsfjord.no/dl/Antennas...%20rev%202.pdf In a brief review of the article by the name found in the Subject line, I came across this bare quote offered above. It contains not one, but two unsupported claims that seem to be commonly encountered in the Short Wave Listening community. The first that is more easily supported or denied is the gain claim of -15 dB. Where does this loss come from? Without any substantiation beyond the inference of comparison to "active antennas," it seems to be lost to indirect references in other writings. However arrived at, this claim is suspicious in the extreme - unless it is a vague and offhand substitution for antenna system gain which goes to the heart of the matter of a poor ground system. If so (the loss is found in the absence of an adequate counterpoise), that is indeed low hanging fruit that has been left rotting on the limb. As for the noise reducing claim, this, too, appears to arrive through indirection or muddied with discussion of active systems. I can only surmise that the lowered noise was the noise of the added circuitry of the active antennas. If you discard the amps, I suppose you can claim you've improved the noise which brings us to the Gordian knot of the low gain needing those amplifiers - most curious writing. At least one person has claimed that noise reducing antennas are noisy. But when I quizzed him about his implementation, it turned out that he had not implemented the antenna correctly. If you do not follow the instructions, then you may end up with a noise increasing antenna like he did. Good reporting would have described the defect so that the solution could be observed as rational rather than prescribed. much to my amazement, that long coax (50 feet) lead often degrades 2nd order intercepts of active whip antennas by 20 dB or more and degrades 3rd order intercepts of active whip antennas by up to 10 dB, depending on the type of active whip antenna. It would appear that "depending on the type of" antenna begs the question why coax is the culprit. I can see how this kind of writing spawns a new superstition of the superiority of twin lead. More could be said about Common Mode suppression (which the designs on this page do NOT entirely address). 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Another Dallas Lankford article on synch detectors | Shortwave | |||
The RF notch filter Dallas Lankford uses | Shortwave | |||
Dallas ham? loop antennas? | General | |||
Dallas ham/loop antennas??? | Equipment | |||
Dallas ham/loop antennas??? | Equipment |