Owen Duffy wrote:
Search for 8010ABD100 on their home page.

It says "ready to connect to *your* coax", "RG8X not included)"
It's not their fault if *your* coax is lossy. :-) Wonder what
kind of balun that is?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

the loss is unacceptable in my opinion. the lobes off the antenna are
unpredictable.

an all band antenna like that is just to get on the air.

i have met Mr. Rogers several times.

Gravity

"gravity" wrote in message
reenews.net...
the loss is unacceptable in my opinion. the lobes off the antenna are
unpredictable.

an all band antenna like that is just to get on the air.

i have met Mr. Rogers several times.

Gravity

The antenna pattern is highly predictable using modeling software.
The transmission line losses are probably not as high as Owen predicts
since we do not know the value of the attenuator inside the balun.
I have seen at least three antennas that had attenuators in antenna matching
networks in order to meet wideband VISOR requirements. These included
a 25 ft marine whip, and a military vehicular antenna. All you need is a
3 dB pad for 3:1 VISOR.

Giving a power rating to a dipole is suspicious also; although voltage
breakdown may be a factor. Note that it is rated at 400 WE "ROMS"
-- whatever the heck that is supposed to mean.

Regards,

Frank

Sorry I must have clicked spell check for VSWR not "VISOR"! Also
"W" for "WE" and "RMS" for "ROMS".

Frank


"Frank" wrote in message
newsWxng.91970$S61.1023@edtnps90...
"gravity" wrote in message
reenews.net...
the loss is unacceptable in my opinion. the lobes off the antenna are
unpredictable.

an all band antenna like that is just to get on the air.

i have met Mr. Rogers several times.

Gravity

The antenna pattern is highly predictable using modeling software.
The transmission line losses are probably not as high as Owen predicts
since we do not know the value of the attenuator inside the balun.
I have seen at least three antennas that had attenuators in antenna
matching
networks in order to meet wideband VISOR requirements. These included
a 25 ft marine whip, and a military vehicular antenna. All you need is a
3 dB pad for 3:1 VISOR.

Giving a power rating to a dipole is suspicious also; although voltage
breakdown may be a factor. Note that it is rated at 400 WE "ROMS"
-- whatever the heck that is supposed to mean.

Regards,

Frank

"Frank" wrote in message
news:uZxng.91997$S61.76029@edtnps90...
Sorry I must have clicked spell check for VSWR not "VISOR"! Also
"W" for "WE" and "RMS" for "ROMS".

i googled VISOR thinking it was some cool military antenna.

Gravity

The antenna pattern is highly predictable using modeling software.

he would have to model the antenna, then figure out what beam headings he
desires, then find supports for the antenna. this is IMPOSSIBLE on most
sububan lots.

The transmission line losses are probably not as high as Owen predicts
since we do not know the value of the attenuator inside the balun.

he might as well use a dummy load.

Gravity

The antenna pattern is highly predictable using modeling software.

oh it's predictable all right, however it's often USELESS. it's a
compromise antenna relative to decent dipoles.

Gravity

These included
a 25 ft marine whip, and a military vehicular antenna. All you need is a
3 dB pad for 3:1 VISOR.

you can burn up 6 dB in an antenuator and RG 58. and that's if the SWR is 1
to 1.

if someone has interest in 28 mhz, just put up a rotatable dipole too.

Gravity

Giving a power rating to a dipole is suspicious also; although voltage
breakdown may be a factor. Note that it is rated at 400 WE "ROMS"
-- whatever the heck that is supposed to mean.

400 w RMS.
750 w peak.

Gravity

check out their Windom. not bad.

http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/5840

Gravity