My 86 or 89 foot crank-up tower project seems to be progressing through my County review boards. So now I am getting really excited for my first tower. I am now in ham nirvana because I have to start
I'm not sure why you say that. If the three antennas are fully independent (i.e., separate elements) and if they were properly designed to minimize interactions (definitely possible with today's mode
On 4/18/2013 2:06 PM, Wayne Willenberg wrote: I am now in ham nirvana because I have to start making up my mind on which antenna(s) to put on the 15 mast. Here is my first dilemma. Should I put up a
Wayne, Another consideration in addition to the degradation from 20/15/10 monobanders stacked on a 15 foot mast is whether you want antennas for the WARC bands on the mast later too. I have an 18 foo
I sure like my C31XR at 79' with a Delta 240 mounted 10' above it. I plan on changing out the 240 with a Delta 230/240 and lower it to about 7' above the C31xr then add a WARC 2/2 at the 10' level. T
It appears this has become a "I love my antenna" pile-on, so here's my .02. Since the original question was for multiple beams on a very tall crank up (89'), You can get almost all bands on one boom.
Remember guys! He said "cranh up! You are thinking of three monobanders on a 15' mast? That's a lot more leverage than the same area at the top of the tower. OTOH were the tribander to be put on top
Dont expect the same performance from a log-P compared to a monobander..... Logs are compromise antennas. Having said this, my M2 Log P covers 10 trough 40 and currently sits on a US 89' tower and wo
Go for the SkyHawk tribander. Much better than the Force 12 and less expensive too... Longer boom etc. 73, Ted K2QMF ____________________________________________________________ Mortgage Rates at 2.2
I love my Skyhawk and you can load it with a tuner to work 17 & 12M. Just finished my DXCC on those bands. 73 Jerry France K7LY Lake Havasu City, AZ 73, Ted K2QMF plan on changing out the 240 with a
Ted, I may have missed something and there may be several models of the skyhawk that I don't know about but the K7LXC/ N0AX tribander report rated the C31 considerably Higher than the skyhawk but did
His question is whether to choose the tribander or monobanders I've seen very little that has addressed the original question. 73 Roger (K8RI) _______________________________________________ ________
Amen. It appears this has become a "I love my antenna" pile-on, so here's my .02. Since the original question was for multiple beams on a very tall crank up (89'), You can get almost all bands on one
Wayne, I have done a ton of modeling and think the direction you are heading (with the multi-monoband on a single boom sort of Force-12 design) is the best way to go. Multiple monobanders on a single
Gents: Here, here for the Skyhawk. I've had mine up for 12 years, loads on 17 and 12, broadbanded. 73 de Gene Smar AD3F I love my Skyhawk and you can load it with a tuner to work 17 & 12M. Just finis
HEllo Wayne What´s your interest? Contest or DX? If contest, you will do SOAB, Single operator monoband or Multi Single? If I were you and I will do DX, I choose a tribander. If I will do Contest and
This is an excellent question and it is interesting that on paper there is little difference between the monobanders and tribander, even the price is the same. I have modeled a number of monnbanders
Tribander (assuming interlaced full size elements) A. less interaction B. less strain on the mast C. ability to put a shorty-40 or WARC antenna above the tribander All of which I've seen pointed out
My vote is for the rugged KT36XA. Construction takes a little longer than the traditional tribander, but with its 32 foot boom you'll be close to what a 6 el mono does on 10 and it is a solid perform
Once you go mono you'll never go back! David Robbins K1TTT e-mail: mailto:k1ttt@arrl.net web: http://wiki.k1ttt.net AR-Cluster node: 145.69MHz or telnet://k1ttt.net __________________________________