If it's designed for that kind of environment... it may not be, as that
would add to the cost. Somebody was making antennas with copper tape
embedded in fibreglass elements years ago... I'm sure what happened to
them... seemed like a good idea, especially for 40M
From: Guy Olinger, K2AV [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: September 15, 2002 2:51 PM
To: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: Re: [Towertalk] The StepIR
One consideration FOR the SteppIR, based on this thread and some posts
The SteppIR may fare BETTER than regular aluminum antennas in
The copper tape itself is sealed inside the stepper housing and the
fiberglass tubes. It is exposed only to what manages to leak inside.
Although I suspect that salt spray will do something to the fiberglass
exterior, and its effect on RF performance is unclear, at least you
will not have salt spray attacking the joints between telescoping
aluminum sections and reducing conductivity at those joints.
Not at all an illogical idea that the SteppIR might be a good answer
for salt spray environments.
As with all the rest of the considerations, a little time in grade
will answer many questions.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mel Martin (VE2DC)" <email@example.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2002 12:49 PM
Subject: [Towertalk] The StepIR
> A few comments...
> Not that innovative... anybody remember the "Cliffdweller" about 30
> ago? Same basic idea... for 40 and 80... single element though.
> Caution is not "pessimism and negativity"...
> And some of the statements of proponents of the antenna:
> "No compromises" - yes there are... the biggest one is mechanical
> "will require less maintenance than all the traps and exposed metal
> ham antennas depend upon today' - This is misrepresenting the
> the reflector. Maintenance can be a problem for aluminium antennas
> specific environments... such as exposure to salt spray. I doubt the
> would fare better... a simple 3-el aluminium Yagi should last just
> forever in most environments. Traps are another subject, and trapped
> tribanders are not really "state of the art" as far as reliability.
> messing with beams for more years than I like to relate... frankly,
> sceptic. I believe in the K.I.S.S. method. (Keep It Simple, Stupid!)
> again, I've been wrong before...
> If you need continuous frequency coverage, and/or have relatively
> access to the antenna, it might make sense... Might also be a great
> FD/DXpedition antenna...
> >-As long as sincerely interested prospective buyers do not get
> >by all the pessimism and negativity against a new and innovative
> Self Supporting Towers, Wireless Weather Stations, see web site:
> Call 888-333-9041 to place your order, mention you saw this ad and
take an additional 5 percent off
> any weather station price.
> Towertalk mailing list