Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#12
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hi Michael,
Thank you for your comments! I'd be interested in trading experiences with you on the OCF topic, either here or direct. Did you make one or buy one? I have interleaved some other responses below... 73, Ed "Michael Coslo" wrote in message ... Old Ed wrote: Reg, The type of antenna you describe is very useful and popular. However, your assertion is much too sweeping as a generalization. In no particular order, here are some caveats: 1. The qualifier "best" is largely meaningless, absent an agreed set of weighted criteria for "goodness." (How important is: size? weight? cost? visual profile? bandwidth? instant QSY? gain? pattern? low-band performance vs. high-band performance? power-handling capacity? need for tuner? etc., etc., etc.) I'm always hesitant to use words like "best" for all the reasons you state, but I think that Reg qualified things pretty well. I think Reg's ONLY qualifiers were "all round, all band" (presumably meaning 80 thru 10). To me, that description falls well short of the mark, as "qualifiers." Within the qualifications of all band dipoles, the ladder-line fed general dipole is pretty darn hard to beat. I recommend them to any new hams that ask me for advice on antennas. You can make a good case for this proposition. But I'm a bit puzzled on how these qualify as A-1 newbie antennas. First, our newbie to learn how to coddle finicky ladder line, bring it into the shack, and make the transition to unbalanced feed. Then he/she needs a crash course on transmatches: 1. Balanced or unbalanced design? (If unbalanced, may not work well with this antenna; if balanced, may not work with future, coax-fed antennas.) 2. Low or high power? (If low, may need to upgrade later.) 3. Manual or automatic? (If automatic, how interface to rig?) 4. Which brand and model? (Might Fine Junk or $quality$?) 5. New or used? 6. How do you operate the transmatch? If our newbie wants some power-handling capability, and plans to buy it new, he/she will need an extra 500 to 700 USD and more space on the desk. Re Reg's reference to a choke balun: I've been looking for good quality, commercial choke baluns equipped with SO-239 inputs and outputs. So far, I haven't found any; and I haven't been quite motivated enough to make one. What should our newbie do to get one, if needed? My rationale is that most new hams these days buy rigs that are all-band, transistorized units.These units are also sensitive to mismatches between antenna and rig. Most new hams are not antenna gurus either. So here is an antenna that will allow them to get on the air without a lot of fussing. The only real measurement caveats are some lengths that you don't want to use. I can't quite see how slogging thru all the above is going to be easier for a newbie than buying a Buckmaster OCF or basic trap dipole, buying a ready-made coax jumper of the required length, and then doing plug- and-play with the (typical) rig's built-in auto-tuner. But it probably would be more educational. So we end up with an antenna that allows the newbie to get on the air, allows them to learn some stuff by twiddling knobs and such, then when they have a bit more experience, they can tackle that more "advanced antenna" with it's more exacting design, trimming , and measurements. I'm having a hard time figuring out what antenna type(s) would be "more advanced" than the random-length-doublet-with-outboard-ATU, and yet require more fiddling. But I will grant you this: IF someone decides from the get-go that they want a glitzy transmatch at their operating position--whether they need it or not--then the balanced-feeder doublet makes pretty good sense. This would be especially true if there wasn't enough space for something like a Buckmaster OCF, but there was enough space for (say) an 88' doublet. 2. A good case can be made that choosing the "right" length is "better" than a random length, within this type. 3. An excellent case can be made that center-fed is NOT always the "best" option, within this type. 4. I'll let the fans of this antenna type chime in with why they prefer balanced tuners and/or tuned feeders to the use of an unbalanced tuner... if they want to. (I use more tailored antennas, and don't need a tuner of any kind, most of the time.) As I do now. I've really been smitten with my OCF dipole, fed with Coax, because in no small part, the feedpoint drops straight down to my shack. That coupled with an automatic tuner in my radio , allowing me to "plug and play. But I still strongly urge newcomers to put up one of those ladder line dipoles for the experience. They work okay, too! 8^) "Reg Edwards" wrote in message ... The best, all round, all band, antenna is a high centre-fed dipole of no particular length, fed with an open-wire feedline of no particular length or impedance, all the way to the shack, used with a choke-balun and an unbalanced tuner. It is good down to the frequency at which the dipole is about 1/3-wavelength long. Simplicity = efficiency. Once tried you will never return to anything else. ---- Reg. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Hams attempt to destroy GMRS! | Policy | |||
Hams attempt to destroy GMRS! | Policy | |||
World record attempt | Broadcasting | |||
The Pool | Policy | |||
First attempt at an all-news or an "all-news-and-talk" station in Canada? | Broadcasting |