| To: | "Bill Stewart" <cwopr@embarqmail.com>, "Richard Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Topband: 160m Inverted L High SWR |
| From: | "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com> |
| Reply-to: | Tom W8JI <w8ji@w8ji.com> |
| Date: | Wed, 2 Oct 2013 13:50:44 -0400 |
| List-post: | <topband@contesting.com">mailto:topband@contesting.com> |
I thought the "Q" of the antenna was not vry good since the SWR curve is vry broad. Q means many things. Some things might be good, some things might be bad, and some things are just meaningless. SWR bandwidth by itself does not tell you a thing about antenna efficiency or performance. SWR bandwidth is SWR bandwidth, nothing more or less. A narrow antenna can have terrible efficiency, and a broad antenna can have great efficiency. It can also be the other way around. Beware of anything equating radiation performance to SWR bandwidth. _________________ Topband Reflector |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Topband: 160m Inverted L High SWR, Jim Bennett |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Topband: 160m Inverted L High SWR, Mike Waters |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Topband: 160m Inverted L High SWR, Jim Bennett |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Topband: 160m Inverted L High SWR, Grant Saviers |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |