=2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I recently set up a multiband dipole with six elements tuned for 40,
20, and 10 respectively. I now find myself wondering if I should
convert it to monoband dipoles.

The end result would be three coplanar monoband dipoles with three
coincident feedpoints with three parallel runs of ~100 feet of RG-58
coax to an antenna switch in the shack.

What effect would this change have on performance?

Jack.
=2D --=20
Jack Twilley
jmt at twilley dot org
http colon slash slash www dot twilley dot org slash tilde jmt slash
=2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQE/1RW6GPFSfAB/ezgRAquAAKCm5vQacEYv59sE39pCFsyoNsaiVQCfQeLy
+7mXWiv1dYegl7T63zu3uIo=3D
=3DsW9G
=2D----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Jack,
I seriously doubt if it will have any noticable affect,
other than to block out a little more sun light and cost
three times as much.
'Doc

Jack,

I had dipoles for 40, 17 and 12 meters fed off a common feedpoint, and
presently have 40 and 17. SWR is below 1.5:1 on both bands. I have run EZNEC
on both of these, and have not found any meaningful loss in gain relative to
a single dipole.

If you want to improve things, get rid of the RG58. At 10 meters, LMR240
will get you at least a db. It weigh about the same, and is only about .04
inch bigger. It will also take 1400W.

Tam/WB2TT
"Jack Twilley" wrote in message
...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I recently set up a multiband dipole with six elements tuned for 40,
20, and 10 respectively. I now find myself wondering if I should
convert it to monoband dipoles.

The end result would be three coplanar monoband dipoles with three
coincident feedpoints with three parallel runs of ~100 feet of RG-58
coax to an antenna switch in the shack.

What effect would this change have on performance?

Jack.
- --
Jack Twilley
jmt at twilley dot org
http colon slash slash www dot twilley dot org slash tilde jmt slash
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQE/1RW6GPFSfAB/ezgRAquAAKCm5vQacEYv59sE39pCFsyoNsaiVQCfQeLy
+7mXWiv1dYegl7T63zu3uIo=
=sW9G
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----