Does anyone know where I can get plans for this antenna? Materials needed
to build one?

Thanks

George Cronk wrote:
Does anyone know where I can get plans for this antenna? Materials needed
to build one?

ARRL Antenna Book
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

MFJ makes a phased 5/8 wave 2 meter antenna that also works as a 1/2 wave
vertical on 6. Sells for $49 at HRO.
73 Dave K4JRB

George Cronk wrote in message
54.205...
Does anyone know where I can get plans for this antenna? Materials needed
to build one?

Thanks

George Cronk wrote in message . 154.205...
Does anyone know where I can get plans for this antenna? Materials needed
to build one?

Thanks

You would be better off with a 1/4 wave ground plane on 2m. Seriously.
And one of those can be as simple as five 19 inch pieces of wire and a
So-239 connector. MK

"Mark Keith" wrote in message
om...
George Cronk wrote in message
. 154.205...
Does anyone know where I can get plans for this antenna? Materials
needed
to build one?

Thanks

You would be better off with a 1/4 wave ground plane on 2m. Seriously.
And one of those can be as simple as five 19 inch pieces of wire and a
So-239 connector. MK

Why would he be better off with a 1/4 wave, with it's large vertical lobe?

On Sat, 3 Apr 2004 06:36:31 -0500, "Dave VanHorn"
wrote:

You would be better off with a 1/4 wave ground plane on 2m. Seriously.
And one of those can be as simple as five 19 inch pieces of wire and a
So-239 connector. MK

Why would he be better off with a 1/4 wave, with it's large vertical lobe?

Hi Dave,

For any of a couple of reasons, principal among them being simplicity.
I have 2M, 220 and 440 versions with drooping radials that match quite
easily and couldn't be any cheaper for only the cost of the SO239. As
for "it's large vertical lobe," I am not sure what you mean by that.
The 5/8ths has more gain, but not so much more in a band and
application that is dominated by line of sight communication. If the
difference between the two is important to getting into a repeater,
getting into the repeater is not the same as full quieting and can be
an obnoxious advantage suffered by those who have to listen to a poor
connection. Such problems are more simply remedied by elevating the
existing antenna than trying to "add gain."

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

The 5/8ths has more gain, but not so much more in a band and
application that is dominated by line of sight communication.

Funny, it's made a significant difference for me in the decade or so I've
been using them.

A folded monopole is almost as simple, and has more gain as well.
http://www.w4dex.com/kc4fwc/proj_2.htm

If the
difference between the two is important to getting into a repeater,
getting into the repeater is not the same as full quieting and can be
an obnoxious advantage suffered by those who have to listen to a poor
connection.

?? More gain is worse?
I don't follow you. Being able to run into the same machines at lower power
is always good for my batteries, and taking me from noisy to quiet on the
same power is always a good thing.

Such problems are more simply remedied by elevating the
existing antenna than trying to "add gain."

Altitude is king, as long as you don't throw it all away in the feedline.

On Sat, 3 Apr 2004 14:35:29 -0500, "Dave VanHorn"
wrote:


The 5/8ths has more gain, but not so much more in a band and
application that is dominated by line of sight communication.

Funny, it's made a significant difference for me in the decade or so I've
been using them.

Less than 1 dB is significant? Are we talking about VHF FM DXing?

If the
difference between the two is important to getting into a repeater,
getting into the repeater is not the same as full quieting and can be
an obnoxious advantage suffered by those who have to listen to a poor
connection.

?? More gain is worse?

More gain is not always enough gain. Again, if this is about getting
into a repeater, the less than 1dB difference that holds it open with
a scratchy signal is no panacea. There is nothing your contacts can
do to improve your poor S/N ratio; so, in a sense, it being better is
only from your point of view and an imposition on others to strain
their ears.

I don't follow you. Being able to run into the same machines at lower power
is always good for my batteries, and taking me from noisy to quiet on the
same power is always a good thing.

The same logic applies to getting your buddies to push your car to
boost your MPG. Better MPG cannot be said to be bad, but then you
aren't the one doing the pushing.

Such problems are more simply remedied by elevating the
existing antenna than trying to "add gain."

Altitude is king, as long as you don't throw it all away in the feedline.

Adding altitude also overcomes obstructions that could easily strip
away the added "loss" of the line.

My buddy's 2M repeater is over a nearby hill from me (I am roughly 100
feet below its crest) and 10 miles away. I can hit it with a pocket
HT (100mW with a cheesy antenna) from inside my basement, but move
into another room and it's a morgue. A "better" antenna is hardly
going to do as good a job as the same poor one above ground level. A
"better" antenna will not fit in the pocket, so "better" is entirely
subjective with its objective analysis not so much very better.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Dave VanHorn wrote:
?? More gain is worse?

Depends on the TOA. Around Phoenix, we had a mountaintop repeater
that we could hit better with a 1/4 wave than with a 5/8 wave when
we were close to the base of the mountain upon which it resided.
That's where we camped out a lot.
--
73, Cecil, W5DXP



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

"Dave VanHorn" wrote in message ...
"Mark Keith" wrote in message
om...
George Cronk wrote in message
. 154.205...
Does anyone know where I can get plans for this antenna? Materials
needed
to build one?

Thanks

You would be better off with a 1/4 wave ground plane on 2m. Seriously.
And one of those can be as simple as five 19 inch pieces of wire and a
So-239 connector. MK

Why would he be better off with a 1/4 wave, with it's large vertical lobe?

Cuz it's easier decoupled with it's 1/4 wave radials, and is less
likely to have feedline radiation than the funky 5/8 antenna with 1/4
wave radials. In direct comparisons here, the 1/4 GP was a good bit
better than the 5/8 with 1/4 radials. The maximum gain of an elevated
1/4 wave GP on 2m, mounted at 35 ft at the base, is appx 6.2 dbi at 3
degrees. The maximum gain of a 5/8 GP with horizontal 1/4 wave
radials, at the same height, is about 4.7 dbi at the same angle. And
this does not yet take into account any decoupling problems! If the
feedline radiates, any gain on the horizon is likely lost as the
pattern is skewed up off the horizon. The average 5/8 antenna is
ruined by using 1/4 wave radials. A 5/8 should be paired with a mirror
image 5/8 to function properly. IE: dual 5/8 collinear such as the
isopole, etc...
And decoupling must still be used even on those. I agree with one
thing Richard said about height and a 1/4 wave..If you get the tip of
the 1/4 GP at the same height as the tip of a tall dual 5/8 collinear,
there is little real difference between the two. And the dual 5/8's
collinear is better than a 5/8 GP. 2m is real critical as far as the
low angles used, and also to the effects of feedline radiation
lowering the gain at those low angles. Now on 10m, many times I do
prefer a 5/8 GP over a 1/4 GP, but there the angles used are less
critical.
If your 5/8's works, I wouldn't worry much, but in comparing them in
A/B tests, "at appx 35 ft" I've never seen a 5/8 GP with 1/4 radials
beat a 1/4 wave GP with 1/4 radials. I once built a fancy 5/8 GP with
a nice larson coil, lots of 1/4 wave radials, etc...Was a super
dud...I tore it up the 1st day and went back to a 1/4 wave. The 1/4
wave was an average 3-4 S units better on local rptrs, and simplex.
About the same difference as comparing a undecoupled ringo ranger, to
a decoupled ringo ranger 2... MK