Its all subjective at the end of the day in Ham Radio via email... there
just isn't sub-text or body language to help clarify statements.
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Gilbert" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 6:52 PM
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Chicken Wire Ground Screen
> I really, really wish people would stop making generalities like that
> regarding amps versus antennas. Every situation is different, and many
> don't even come close to supporting that statement. Here are two
> hypothetical examples:
> 1. Somebody has a 50 foot tree in the back yard of his suburban lot
> with a couple of dipoles hung from it, oriented in different directions
> and fed with 100 watts on 40m through 15m via a tuner. He's going to
> hear most stuff just fine, and the $800 bucks he spends on a good used
> amplifier is going to be far more cost effective for making contacts
> than whatever he would have to spend to put up a tower, tribander, and a
> shorty-40. Less visual impact on the neighborhood as well.
> 2. Somebody on a large acreage has a decent vertical antenna capable of
> tuning both 160m and 80m with a switchable L-network. He can spend a
> few hundred dollars for a used amp, lay out a few BOGs or build a
> rotatable loop (pennant, K9AY, etc) for better receive, and end up with
> a 10 db signal versus the maybe 5 db stronger signal he'd get from
> spending the same amount of money on a 4-square or any reasonable
> I'm not knocking the advantages of better antennas, and if you check my
> web site you'll see that I just sunk a hefty chunk of money into mine
> within the last 18 months, but I think the cost effectiveness versus an
> amp is an exaggerated generality.
> Dave AB7E
> Its from Onion wrote:
>> As we all have learned every dollar spent on a antenna equals 5 spent on
>> a amp. cant hear 'em=cant work 'em but it QRM's people that can.
> TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk mailing list