PatW wrote:
Also remember that a terminated rhombic has 50% loss, about the same as the B&W.

But, unlike the B&W, that loss is in only one direction
which turns the rhombic into an effective directional beam.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/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! =-----

"PatW" wrote in message
m...
Also remember that a terminated rhombic has 50% loss, about the same as
the B&W.
Pat W0OPW

If GAIN - LOSS 0 you still come out ahead.

Tam/WB2TT

Try this: a 16 Ohm resistor in series with each side of the dipole, and a
100 Ohm resistor across the feedpoint. Unless I messed up, this will give
you SWR = 2:1 for all conditions including shorted, and absent dipoles.

Thanks Tam, This is exactly what I was looking for. A dummy load is 0%
efficient. A B&W dipole is less than 20% on 80m and 160m. It costs a lot of
money. There are less expensive ways to achieve 20% efficiency on 160m and
80m. 0% does not radiate (dummy load), a good bad antenna in my opinion is one
that radiates, but not too much. And it can't cost too much.
73 Gary N4AST

Try this: a 16 Ohm resistor in series with each side of the dipole, and a
100 Ohm resistor across the feedpoint. Unless I messed up, this will give
you SWR = 2:1 for all conditions including shorted, and absent dipoles.
Tam/WB2TT

========================

There's no need to mess about with the antenna. Just connect a crude
attenuator at the transmitter end of the transmission line. This much
reduces the cost of the antenna. It's then just a length of wire.