Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

[AMPS] Dollars per dB

To: <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: [AMPS] Dollars per dB
From: n4zr@contesting.com (Pete Smith)
Date: Fri, 01 Jan 1999 17:08:00 +0000
At 10:19 AM 1/1/99 -0600, T A RUSSELL wrote:
>
>
>On Thu, 31 Dec 1998 17:29:11 -0800 "Larry L. Ravlin"
><sheepdip@continet.com> writes:
>>
>>What this all boils down to (and by the way you are absolutely correct 
>>in your figures) is "you are better off to sink you bucks into a GOOD 
>>antenna than a amplifier.  
>>this does not mean that I am against power, far from it, but there is 
>>More to gain from a good antenna than there is from a good amp.
>>
>>Larry K0AEY
>
>Dollars per dB is a good way to look at optimizing station design 
>for a fixed or limited budget.   The tradeoffs can get quite complex 
>and require  ACCURATE  and COMPLETE data.  Don't forget the
>cost of a tower and rotor.  BTW,  Higher is NOT ALWAYS better.
>And, you can never have TOO  MANY  antennas!
...

I would argue, as well, thatit is fallacious (as K2UVG did) to count double
for antenna dB, on the theory that they help both transmit and receive --
my own belief is that below 6 meters, and maybe there as well,
environmental noise is the limiting factor, not system gain.  Hence the
value of directive antennas on all bands, to improve the overall S/N ratio.  

As Tom says, the tradeoffs are mighty complex, and every time you change
the baseline by making one improvement or another, they need to be redone.

73, Pete Smith N4ZR
n4zr@contesting.com 

Loud is good.

--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html
Submissions:              amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-amps@contesting.com
Search:                   http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>