> I think the query referred to using five nine for the
aerial itself, which
> in fact does make a difference .. somewhere I have that
formula ... shall
> look. However, the debate continues if using coax and
all that for the
> dipole has any value whatsoever ... current opinions tend
towards it's just
> a way to make a dipole more difficult, with no rewards at
the end of one's
> labors .. 73 Mark AA6DX
Shades of Owls and Spider Balls! This isn't a debate or just
opinions about things that are difficult to quantify.
The ARRL and Walt Maxwell (and several others) did the math,
and the math shows the coax doesn't do much except add a
little loss and very little bandwidth change over a regular
heavy wire dipole. Now I'm sure the Buzzoka would be wider
than a #20 copper wire, because the coax is much thicker and
has the same or more loss.
I actually measured two antennas, and the first time I saw
no difference at all (but I had poor test gear in 1975) and
the second time I measured within a few percent of what the
ARRL predicted (on lab grade equipment). If you read the
Handbook, consider their calculations as almost the same as
a real world test...because they are.
See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather
Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any questions
and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
TowerTalk mailing list