Richard,
you have responded to my post but frankly I miss the point or points
you are trying to make. Sorry about that as I would have liked a discussion
on the subject
Regards
Art

"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 18:46:52 GMT, "
wrote:
So I consider the statement that 1db is insignificant
a bit over the top when one is working with antennas and what one can
achieve what others can't.

Hi all,

This "over the top" and other straining to get a "louder" signal begs
a real number - like 1dB. Such testimonials (negative or positive)
are emotional comparisons.

This "over the top" expression speaks for itself. If a 12% drop is
outrageously "over the top," then there would be runs on the bank for
the 30% fall of the dollar's value in the world market. Back when we
had double-digit inflation (hmmmm, 12% is double-digit) the party now
in charge went ballistic about the state of the economy. Now that we
have outsourced inflation - 30% is cool. Merely a matter of who's ox
is being gored.

Well, so much for fun with numbers; let's look at "louder" signals.

What does it mean to be "louder" with a modern (post Depression era)
receiver? Is 1 dB perceived as being "louder?" Well, by definition:
just barely (IFF you turn up the volume control). Why do I
parenthetically add this constraint of a necessary active
participation of turning up the volume control? Because in a modern
receiver, the circuitry deliberately compensates for that 1dB boost by
depressing the gain by the same amount. Net result? Voila! 0dB by
perception and design. Well, by aural perception that is. So much
for "louder."

You "might" see (another perception) the S-Meter shift by something
less than one needle's width if that makes you feel that something has
been accomplished - in this case they could as easily calibrate the
meter in ego-Satisfaction units. Then again, maybe you would have
missed 1dB entirely (should we insist on a negative multipliers for
that ego reading?). The correct appeal is found in S+N/N where the
improvement adds clarity - merely bombasting about "loudness" is
provincial.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

A 1 dB change in loudness is about the smallest level of change which is
fairly easily perceived by the human ear. BUT ONLY WITH AN INSTANTANEOUS, X
versus Y, CHANGE IN LOUDNESS.

To attempt to judge the difference, with a precision of 1 S-unit, between
the loudnesses of a G5RV and a 1/2-wave dipole fed by an open-wire line,
with a time lag of months, a change in the number of sunspots, on different
bands, with a different receiver, is futility in the extreme.

Yet some people appear to have no difficulty in making the comparison.

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:55:12 -0800, Richard Clark
wrote:

|On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 18:46:52 GMT, "
wrote:
|So I consider the statement that 1db is insignificant
|a bit over the top when one is working with antennas and what one can
|achieve what others can't.
|
|Hi all,
|
|This "over the top" and other straining to get a "louder" signal begs
|a real number - like 1dB. Such testimonials (negative or positive)
|are emotional comparisons.


One of the biggest thrills I've had in my amateur radio career was
pressing the key and 2.5 seconds later hearing my signal returning
from the moon. I will confess, this was an emotional response [g].
One dB does make a difference. One dB difference in transmission line
loss or antenna gain makes a hell of a difference.

I also got emotional when VU4RBI barely came up out of the noise and I
worked her a few days before the great flood or last night when 3G0YM
gave me a 59 report on 20M and not being able to tell him he was S0, I
fibbed and gave him a 53.

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 01:44:05 GMT, "
wrote:

I would have liked a discussion on the subject

Hi Art,

About superconducting antennas? I've researched patents for a
superconductor think tank in California. Talk about more smoke than
fire.

Unfortunately, a poor choice of phrase, because in a newsgroup, it is
more talk than smoke. errr writing than talking....

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 18:59:20 -0700, Wes Stewart
wrote:

I also got emotional when VU4RBI barely came up out of the noise and I
worked her a few days before the great flood or last night when 3G0YM
gave me a 59 report on 20M and not being able to tell him he was S0, I
fibbed and gave him a 53.

Hi Wes,

I've heard emotional reports befo
"I've got you here five by nine!
Could you repeat, Could, you, re-peat?"

The emotion was humor.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

In article ,
Roy Lewallen wrote:

Reg Edwards wrote:

No he didn't. 7dB, about one S-unit, is not enough to come to anybody's
attention. . .

Yet look at all the people who go to all the trouble of putting up a 3
element beam, then think that the 7 dB gain over a dipole actually makes
their signal louder. Or get a 500 watt amplifier for their 100 watt rig.
Silly fools! Old wives!

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

back on topic,..

i still ponder if i put power into a superconducting antenna if their
is no resistance, and a given about of power would therefore 'stay' in
the antanna longer ie no resistance and a sorta flywheel effect exists
the fields would have to exist longer for fixed-given power , ..

seems that all adds up to more than a trival gain

looks like ill have to use some cheep material like copper or something
elese i can make superconduct unless i can use a supension of
conductive materials into a coolent itself an make a tube that will
radiate while being superconductive just cause i wonder if that will
work as good as a stp based liquid antenna

who knows maybe i'll stumble over 3xtra db

will the antenna stay resonant as it nears criticaltemp? and reaches it?

This discussion kinda reminds me of a tome I read (and once actually
thought possible), from a CQ article by one "Dr. Shorza Gitchigoomie"
(if i spelled that right), progonosticating on the magnicifiant
effects of negative resistance! Like applying it to light bulbs (they
absorb light)! Or, to electric heaters (air conditioning).
If this indeed would work, then why not - the lower the power- the
higher signal strength! 'Corse this article was published , in APRIL,
about 40 some years ago, and in the intervening years have
discovered that there are some serious flaws in his research!
And I dont expect too much out of Super Conductor Antennas (if they
could work well, would not they be in use at the international space
station, as that temperature must be at least colder than liquid
nitrogen)? or have the laws of Newtonian Physics been repealed?
I await the dawning of the new age! Jim NN7K


Richard Clark wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 01:44:05 GMT, "
wrote:


I would have liked a discussion on the subject


Hi Art,

About superconducting antennas? I've researched patents for a
superconductor think tank in California. Talk about more smoke than
fire.

Unfortunately, a poor choice of phrase, because in a newsgroup, it is
more talk than smoke. errr writing than talking....

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

back on topic,..

i still ponder if i put power into a superconducting antenna if their
is no resistance, and a given about of power would therefore 'stay' in
the antanna longer ie no resistance and a sorta flywheel effect exists
the fields would have to exist longer for fixed-given power , ..

seems that all adds up to more than a trival gain

Not really, no, at least not in the commoner cases.

Let's assume that you could find a superconductor which would be
truly superconducting even at RF frequencies (which today's
superconductors are not, I gather). So, you could cut the loss
resistance of the antenna to precisely zero, in this hypothetical
case.

According to a note Reg posted some time ago, "At 3.75 MHz the
resistance of 20 awg copper wire is 0.206 ohms per metre. Overall
end-to-end dipole resistance 8.24 ohms."

Using the hypothetical perfect superconductor (which may be
impossible) you might reduce this dipole resistance to zero. Great
reduction in loss, right?

Less than you'd think. Remember, the loss resistance of 8.24 ohms
appears in series with the antenna's radiation resistance (which is
due to the RF energy being radiated) which will be around 70 ohms for
an antenna in free space. With the loss resistance present, just
under 90% of the energy is radiated ("dissipated" in the "radiation
resistance"), and 10% turns into heat in the loss resistance.

Getting rid of the loss resistance entirely will thus increase your
radiated power by only about 10% - a small fraction of one dB.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

I would like to put a different spin on the 7dB statement below.

Where the extra gain or power really comes into play is very weak signal
DXing - not the pileups necessarily.

Cases in point - my Dxing log has several contacts where using a linear got
my signal far enough above the noise level for the DX station to understand
me. True on phone or CW. In most of these cases, the DX was calling QRZ and
no one was answering -- the DX station was so weak -- seems folks just gave
up or maybe everyone worked them. Turning on the linear got me the
contacts. Definitely Without Question - Worked an R1MV Malyj Vysotskij, HK0
Malpelo Is, VK9/M Mellish Reef, and VP8/G So Georgia by turning on the
linear feeding a vertical multibander.

I had this happen enough times to realize this to be the real benefit of
adding a linear. And it sure can't hurt in a pileup either, if you know how
to work a pileup.


--
Caveat Lector - Honor Roll 2002


Some folks Wrote
No he didn't. 7dB, about one S-unit, is not enough to come to
anybody's
attention. . .

Yet look at all the people who go to all the trouble of putting up a 3
element beam, then think that the 7 dB gain over a dipole actually makes
their signal louder. Or get a 500 watt amplifier for their 100 watt rig.
Silly fools! Old wives!

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

wrote:
Richard,
you have responded to my post but frankly I miss the point or points
you are trying to make.

Join the club, Art.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---