My store bought bazooka was quiet - both noise and signals. My 80-40-20
fan dipole works better. A tuner matches the feedline Z at band edges
and 80m coax swr losses are very low using RG8 or better.
Grant KZ1W
On 11/8/2011 9:27 AM, David Gilbert wrote:
> As I mentioned to Tom privately, W8JI has some notes on his website
> regarding this topic. The idea of "shielded conductors" having better
> noise performance is a myth, and is typical of those that (as W8JI has
> often stated) are impossible to expunge from public consciousness once
> they appear in print.
>
> 73,
> Dave AB7E
>
>
>
> On 11/8/2011 2:24 AM, Steve Hunt wrote:
>> Tom,
>>
>> Wanted signals are EM waves; noise signals are also EM waves. I wonder
>> what characteristic of a Double Bazooka might allow it to distinguish
>> wanted EM waves from unwanted ones in a way that a conventional dipole
>> can't. As you might gather, I'm sceptical :)
>>
>> Measurements and modelling confirm that it DOES have a slightly wider
>> VSWR bandwidth than a wire dipole - partly because of the loss in the
>> stubs, and partly because it's constructed from "fatter" conductors. You
>> could probably achieve the same bandwidth enhancement, without the
>> mechanical complexity, by putting a resistor in parallel with the
>> feedpoint of a conventional dipole.
>>
>> 73,
>> Steve G3TXQ
>>
>> On 08/11/2011 05:54, Tom Osborne wrote:
>>> Hi All
>>>
>>> I've been looking at some info on the Double Bazooka antenna. I know the
>>> 'wide band' aspect has been debunked, but in looking at the design, would it
>>> be a quieter antenna?
>>>
>>> I see that low band loops are shielded on the outside and have an opening at
>>> the top. Wouldn't the bazooka kinda do the same thing, beings the outside
>>> of the antenna is actually shielded? 73
>>>
>>> Tom W7WHY
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> TowerTalk mailing list
>>> TowerTalk@contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TowerTalk mailing list
>> TowerTalk@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|