5/8 WL Antennas ?
 

RHF wrote:
On Dec 29, 8:05 am, RHF wrote:
On Dec 29, 5:42 am, Dave wrote:



Telamon wrote:
In article ,
Dave wrote:
John Smith wrote:
However, in side-by-side comparisons on 10-6-2m antennas I have built,
comparing a 5/8 against the 1/2 (construction methods/materials and
matching components identical) ... the actual difference, in the real
world, must be less than the width of a meter needle in the readings ...
or, put simply, I no longer deal with the extra length required of the
5/8 ... your mileage may vary ...
The advantage of a physical height (antenna length) between 180 and 215
degrees (see previous post regarding the magic number being around 195
degrees) is improved take-off angle and reduced skywave-groundwave
interaction, not dramatic nearfield voltage increases.
Regarding Mr. Smith's comments above my experience and others is the
opposite. 5/8 is a much better performing antenna than a 1/2 wave for
local VHF and UHF communications. Well worth the effort to build a 5/8
wave antenna over a 1/2 wave. The 5/8 had some kind of series load coil
part way up the whip where the 1/2 wave match/compensation was done at
the base so the whip was solid. Sorry I can't more specific then that as
those experiments were many years ago.
Mr. Smith is still lost in space.
- 5/8 wavelength antennas do not require a ground plane, do they?

Dave here is a Picture of a . . .
5/8 WL Ground Plane Antennahttp://home.att.net/~wizardoz/cbmw/Images/antenna2.gifhttp://users.belgacom.net/hamradio/schemas/50mc58golf.gifhttp://users.belgacom.net/hamradio/schemas/on6muvhf58verticalantenna.htm
.
CBers use 5/8 WL Ground Plane Antennas very often.http://cgi.ebay.com/_W0QQitemZ260334577278
* Elevated Vertical Element
* Load Matching Device
* Ground Plane Radialshttp://www.pacificaerials.co.nz/antInfo/antennaTypes.htm#3
.
FWIW the 5/8 WL* does go 'mobile' as a Vertical "CB"
Antenna but it uses the Car's body as the Ground Plane.http://www.firestik.com/Catalog/FS2-FS5.htm
* They do require Tuning {Matching} for Transmithttp://www.firestik.com/Tech_Docs/TUNABLE.htmhttp://www.firestik.com/Catalog/FS2-FS5.htm
.

Some where I remember a 5/8 WL Vertical Element
on top of a 5/8 WL Vertical Mast {Grounded} as being
a very good Antenna : Mono-Pole ? Collinear ?
http://www.signalengineering.com/ultimate/verts.jpg
:
]========"----------------
:
:Ground Level

~ RHF
.
.

Except for the lowly 1/4 Wave Marconi, most antennas work better up in
the air.

MatchBoxes Do They Work ? -aka- Improve Your Effective Radiated Power?
 

On Dec 29, 1:44*pm, John Smith wrote:
RHF wrote:

[...]

- Anyway you cut it ... a matchbox never will improve
- the performance of a poor antenna,

JS,

So you are saying that I have an Antenna and Transceiver
and can hear 5 Radio Operators in a Net on a Frequency;
but only 2 of them can hear me.

I then put a MatchBox in-line between my Antenna and
Transceiver and Adjust-It; and can still hear all 5 Radio
Operators on a Frequency and now all 5 of them can
hear me.

To Me That Is Very Real Improved Performance from
My Antenna and Transceiver that is a direct result of
using the MatchBox between them. ~ RHF

Antenna for shortwave reception
 

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article , Dave
wrote:

John Smith wrote:
Dave wrote:
John Smith wrote:


I said NO such thing, indeed, I stated the EXACT opposite, it allows
maximum power transfer to the antenna, however, the losses in the
POOR antenna are now increased due to the losses in the matchbox--as
heat. And, no problems which exist in the POOR antenna have been
rectified, they are just masked ...

That is vastly oversimplified.

Absolutely, and at some point I must trust the reader has the resources
to extrapolate; otherwise, all postings would soon turn in to the
length, depth and completeness of a college textbook ...

For example, an antenna is a two lane road, running in both
directions(T/R), the same parameters which allow it to be the best
choice for transmitting, also are in action when that same antenna
"plucks" its' signals from the ether ... something I have pointed out
in
multiple ways, multiple times ...

The average person must hear, read, study the same material six times
before "learning" it. And, an instructor once pointed out to me, not
all people respond to the same method, personality,
mode-of-presentation
as another or others ... so, he pointed out the importance of gathering
data from multiple sources until the "epiphany" is realized ...


You're the guy from Lost in Space!

You are to kind Dave. The lost in Space Dr. Smith fooled some of the
people some of the time where our Smith fools none of the people none of
the time.

And who does the Telanut think he is fooling?

MatchBoxes Do They Work ? -aka- Improve Your Effective RadiatedPower ?
 

On Dec 31, 6:13*am, Dave wrote:
RHF wrote:
On Dec 29, 1:44 pm, John Smith wrote:
RHF wrote:

[...]

- Anyway you cut it ... a matchbox never will improve
- the performance of a poor antenna,

JS,

So you are saying that I have an Antenna and Transceiver
and can hear 5 Radio Operators in a Net on a Frequency;
but only 2 of them can hear me.

I then put a MatchBox in-line between my Antenna and
Transceiver and Adjust-It; and can still hear all 5 Radio
Operators on a Frequency and now all 5 of them can
hear me.

To Me That Is Very Real Improved Performance from
My Antenna and Transceiver that is a direct result of
using the MatchBox between them. ~ RHF
*.

- It doesn't make the antenna any better.

? More Signal Out is Not Any Better ?

-*It improves the system performance by reducing
- the reflected mismatch at the generator end of
- the transmission line.

So - All the 'reflected mismatch' is now trapped, wasted,
consumed as a Power Loss in the MatchBox ?
Or - Just may be does some of the 'reflected mismatch'
now get Radiated as Signal Output in the Antenna ?

W6OBB Art Bell's 5-Acre Antenna Farm in Pahrump, Nevada
 

In article ,
John Smith wrote:

RHF wrote:
On Dec 29, 7:18 pm, Dave wrote:
John Smith wrote:

- - his secret
- - location in NV.

- 9041 Desert Lane
- Pahrump, NV 89048
-
- http://maps.google.com
.
Art Bell, W6OBB, Pahrump, Nevada
http://www.smeter.net/pahrump/art-bell.php
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pahrump,_Nevada
.
Art Bell's 5-Acre Antenna Farm
http://www.smeter.net/w6obb/antenna-farm.php
SAT IMAGE = http://tinyurl.com/828s5d
.
The Art Bell W6OBB Loop Antenna Slide Show
http://patriciaray.net/movie1.html

QRZ : Art Bell [W6OBB] Pahrump, Nevada
http://www.qrz.com/callsign.html?callsign=W6OBB
.
.
KNYE-FM 95.1 MHz in Pahrump, Nevada
http://www.knye.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KNYE
http://www.rayjanko.com/area_51/21.htm
http://www.radio-locator.com/cgi-bin...sr=Y&call=KNYE
* From the The Kingdom of [K]NYE . . .
http://www.kingdomofnye.com/
http://www.co.nye.nv.us/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nye_County,_Nevada
.
KNYE-FM 95.1 MHz Transmitter Location :
36° 11' 52" N -by- 116° 02' 08" W
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=e...(KNYE-FM)&om=1
.

Oh yeah, that IS the dirty culprit, and if you know where to turn, in
the 80m band, you just might hear him! lol

Regards,
JS

IF he isn't at his wife's ancestral home in the Philippines....

W6OBB Art Bell's 5-Acre Antenna Farm in Pahrump, Nevada
 

You wrote:

In article ,
John Smith wrote:

RHF wrote:
On Dec 29, 7:18 pm, Dave wrote:
John Smith wrote:

- - his secret
- - location in NV.

- 9041 Desert Lane
- Pahrump, NV 89048
-
- http://maps.google.com
.
Art Bell, W6OBB, Pahrump, Nevada
http://www.smeter.net/pahrump/art-bell.php
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pahrump,_Nevada
.
Art Bell's 5-Acre Antenna Farm
http://www.smeter.net/w6obb/antenna-farm.php
SAT IMAGE = http://tinyurl.com/828s5d
.
The Art Bell W6OBB Loop Antenna Slide Show
http://patriciaray.net/movie1.html

QRZ : Art Bell [W6OBB] Pahrump, Nevada
http://www.qrz.com/callsign.html?callsign=W6OBB
.
.
KNYE-FM 95.1 MHz in Pahrump, Nevada
http://www.knye.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KNYE
http://www.rayjanko.com/area_51/21.htm
http://www.radio-locator.com/cgi-bin...sr=Y&call=KNYE
* From the The Kingdom of [K]NYE . . .
http://www.kingdomofnye.com/
http://www.co.nye.nv.us/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nye_County,_Nevada
.
KNYE-FM 95.1 MHz Transmitter Location :
36° 11' 52" N -by- 116° 02' 08" W
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=e...(KNYE-FM)&om=1
.

Oh yeah, that IS the dirty culprit, and if you know where to turn, in
the 80m band, you just might hear him! lol

Regards,
JS

IF he isn't at his wife's ancestral home in the Philippines....

That's where Cousin Burr is at. Probably sleeping off the 2009 festivities at this
point in time...!

Antenna for shortwave reception
 

In article ,
Dave wrote:

John Smith wrote:
flashdrive wrote:

...
Has anyone ever successfully reverse engineered the pre-amp of a
Wellbrook loop? It might be possible to dissolve the encapsulating
material (epoxy?) to reveal the PCB and componants. Otherwise a
medical scanner (seriously) might reveal some useful information.

My question would be, "Why go to the trouble?"

Indeed, grab a DC - 1Ghz MMIC device (make sure you don't get an SMC
component, unless you like soldering under a microscope), stick a proper
filter for the freqs/bands in front of it, and feed its' input with a
well designed loop ... if you need EXTREME gain, you can cascade a
couple of MMICs.

Regards,
JS

I do SMD rework occasionally, with MagEyes. You'd use a power amplifier
for a pre-amp?

SMD is best for RF but small through lead components on a PCB should be
OK for HF work. Depending on SMD size of the components I use 4X to 10X
magnification.

I agree with Smith, design your own stuff besides how well things work
depends as much on how circuits are physically built or laid out. The
encapsulate is for weather protection not for defeating copying.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Antennas -versus- Amateur Radio Antennas
 

In article ,
"RP" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
John Smith wrote:

Dave wrote:

...
A tuner at the antenna is a much better setup. You are doing things
right. Most HAM's don't. When Mr. Smith imagines doing this he does it
wrong.


He's right, too. My sloper is resonant but I still use a tuner to
protect the transceiver. I was going to use the Remote Autotuner but
don't need it. I get a decent match even on 160.

Actually, Telemundo is just the same old idiot, pulling the same old
tricks and attempting to appear as a guru to those possessing even less
knowledge than himself ...

That's our boy Telamon!

I'm not your boy Mr. Anonymous open news server user.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

MatchBoxes Do They Work ? -aka- Improve Your Effective RadiatedPower ?
 

RHF wrote:
On Dec 29, 1:44 pm, John Smith wrote:
RHF wrote:

[...]

- Anyway you cut it ... a matchbox never will improve
- the performance of a poor antenna,

JS,

So you are saying that I have an Antenna and Transceiver
and can hear 5 Radio Operators in a Net on a Frequency;
but only 2 of them can hear me.

I then put a MatchBox in-line between my Antenna and
Transceiver and Adjust-It; and can still hear all 5 Radio
Operators on a Frequency and now all 5 of them can
hear me.

To Me That Is Very Real Improved Performance from
My Antenna and Transceiver that is a direct result of
using the MatchBox between them. ~ RHF
.

increase the capture area of a poor antenna, etc.

It will MASK that antennas' short-comings ... same as sweeping dirt
under a rug (notice, another mechanical analogy to the above.)

Regards,
JS


I guess, any possibly way it can be explained to you, will fail ...

If you introduce an inductance to resonate the antenna, you introduce a
loss, if you introduce a capacitance, the same ... LC or PI networks,
commonly used in matchboxes, have notable losses.

I have a 60ft longwire, mounted ~40 ft. in the air. Since it is only
physically resonate on but a couple/few freqs, and, since I am not
employing some form of matching on the antenna, and since the antenna
does not, naturally, present a correct impedance to my feedline/rig,
some form of lossy matching must be tolerated ... since the matchbox is
located at my receiver, whatever feedlines I choose will also become a
part of the "antenna." The ideal placement for a matchbox would be at
the antenna, as everyone is and has been aware of for a long time, or
should have been aware.

As I stated, continue to state, and have no other choice than to state
when worried about being correct--no matchbox will ever improve the
performance of a poor antenna--all it can do is allow you to get maximum
benefit of that poor performance.

You have separate components, affects/effects, terms, etc. all confused
and lumped together. Antenna design, capture area, etc. effect antenna
efficiency--the impedance that/those designs/constructions entail, and
the method of matching (transforming) that impedance to one acceptable,
is another "thing", all-together.

Regards,
JS

MatchBoxes Do They Work ? -aka- Improve Your Effective RadiatedPower ?
 

RHF wrote:

...
- It doesn't make the antenna any better.

? More Signal Out is Not Any Better ?

- It improves the system performance by reducing
- the reflected mismatch at the generator end of
- the transmission line.

So - All the 'reflected mismatch' is now trapped, wasted,
consumed as a Power Loss in the MatchBox ?
Or - Just may be does some of the 'reflected mismatch'
now get Radiated as Signal Output in the Antenna ?
.

Yep, the matchbox introduces more loss, no matching network which I am
aware of is truly lossless. Heat is the only way I know of to "lose"
the signal.

If your rig had the correct input impedance to negate the use of a
matchbox, you would suffer none of this loss ... the antenna would then
deliver all the signal it was capable of to the rig.

Regards,
JS