[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] Skyhawk, KT36XA, opinions requested

To: <>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Skyhawk, KT36XA, opinions requested
From: "Peter Voelpel" <>
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 02:54:04 +0200
List-post: <>
I use "alumslip" (I thinks it´s a product from the U.K.) on he joints of my
Thats a kind of grease mixed with very fine aluminum powder.
After mounting and aligment I put a double layer of sef vulcanizing tape
across the joint and cover all with heat shrinking tubes.
Never had any trouble with dismounting those parts.


-----Original Message-----
[] On Behalf Of Robert G. Strickland
Sent: Mittwoch, 10. Oktober 2007 02:25
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Skyhawk, KT36XA, opinions requested


Thanks for this and your other direct message.

Another "issue" comes up that I have seen here and there on the reflector,
but I'm still not sure about the answer.

I live in Syracuse NY, and we have our share of acid rain. It seems that
both antennas - and others - make use of sliding aluminum tubing
connections. What is to prevent oxidation of the connecting surfaces with
resultant deterioration of RF performance? Can this deterioration, if
present, be abated by using some sort of conductive joint compound during

Concerning the KT36XA, it seems that the elements are not spaced using the
more modern element interleaving techniques based on computer modeling. On
the other hand, the antenna clearly uses sophisticated element length
adjustment using stub sections and, I imagine, capacity loading. It has a
longer boom. So, does this represent "one way" of achieving optimum
multi-band performance, or is the uniform spacing inferior by design to
those tribanders using interleaved element spacing?

You can tell I'm new to yagis. About quads I can speak at some length <g>.

Thanks to all who are contributing to this thread. All comments have been
most helpful. Great group.


At 10/09/2007 07:31, wrote:
>In a message dated 10/7/2007 9:39:38 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, 
> writes:
> >  I'm thinking of replacing my quad with either a Skyhawk or M2's 
> > KT36XA
>     Sounds like you should take a gander at our tribander comparison 
> report from 
> The SkyHawk and KT34XA were both tested. The KLM KT34XA had a couple 
> of anomalies that may or may not be present in the 36 (methinks not). 
> And Mike Stall said that the 36 has a few more tenths of a dB gain but 
> not anything significant so I think you can make some valid inferences 
> from the 34 data. And it's only seventeen bucks plus s/h.
>Steve    K7LXC
>Champion Radio Products
>Cell: 206-890-4188
>See what's new at <>
>and <>Make AOL 
>Your Homepage.

Robert G. Strickland PhD ABPH - KE2WY
Syracuse, New York  USA


TowerTalk mailing list


TowerTalk mailing list

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