Like ignoring solar variables, orbital dynamics, and ocean current oscillations, and blaming a trace gas (CO2) for global warming.... this is another one of those uncontrolled-variables-conclusions.
This is a ridiculous claim. How can it be noticeably better than a 4el 10m yagi on a 16' boom or a 3 el 20m yagi (like a Hy-Gain 203BA) on a 16' boom? KK9A <snip> unfortunately, that doesn't say much
"This is a ridiculous claim. How can it be noticeably better than a 4el 10m yagi on a 16' boom or a 3 el 20m yagi (like a Hy-Gain 203BA) on a 16' boom?" Noticeably? I dunno. However, it could be bett
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- Better how? Gain? F/B? Width of main lobe? Absence of side lobes? What? Nearly all antennas are 100% efficient at squirting out the RF, it is just a question of
After spending all that money for a SteppIr antenna, nobody's gonna call their kid ugly. I am putting up a 4 element HyGain 204BA on a 34 foot boom. Can't wait to find me a horse race with a SteppIr!
Maybe his claim is too broad, since "anything else" might include mono-banders. However, if the claim is restricted to tri-band or multi-band antennas, it is does not strain credulity as much as one
The same could be said for an antenna farm consisting of multiple monobanders. Not a cheap investment when you consider the cost of the antennas plus two or more towers to put them all on. Question:
The HyGain 204BA has a 26 ft boom, the 205BA has a 34 ft boom. Tell us more about your 204BA on a 34 ft boom? Doug After spending all that money for a SteppIr antenna, nobody's gonna call their kid u
Not so ridiculous. Noticeable is, of course, in the eye of the beholder, but A 3 el SteppIR doesn't have to compromise to try and get performance at a variety of frequencies with the same length elem
A Designs with a lot of superdirectivity would tend to fall in this category, since they are notoriously sensitive to small changes in dimensions. One could actually analyze it: there's a theoretical
Author: "Richard M. Gillingham" <rmoodyg@bellsouth.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 07:11:39 -0400
Umm How's that antenna on 17M? 15? 12? 10??? If you put up monobanders for each of those bands, I bet you beat the pants off a Steppir. But what was all that about $$$ I've got a 3 el Steppir. On a c
Bob... John is right...I was thinking multi-banders, not monobanders. Loose language on my part. However, in an honest A/B test, you will find that the differences between the 204ba and 4 el steppIR
While we all agree all antennas have losses and bandwidth limits, there isn't much useful in all this subjective hyperbole about traps having "astonishing losses" and "optimization on 14.015MHz will
Between 204BA & SteppIR 4El, it will be a valid horse race on 20 (although the SteppIR may beat you when a P5 shows up 180 deg away from where you both are looking). SteppIR will very likely do much
That's easy to do. Take a 5 element 205BA, remove one of the directors, run the YO antenna modeling program using the 34 foot boom and, viola, you have a 4 element beam on a 34 foot boom. Bob W6TR --
4 years down the road when propagation is better, those upper bands will be rocking with activity and the SteppIR will be a very worthwhile antenna to have. Right now 20 and 17 are the only bands tha
Right, and multiple SteppIRs on multiple towers would be far more expensive than multiple monobanders on multiple towers. Makes no sense. However, for a single-tower SO2R or M/S/2 contest station, a
However then its NO 204BA any more! / 73 Jim -- Bob Maser wrote: That's easy to do. Take a 5 element 205BA, remove one of the directors, run the YO antenna modeling program using the 34 foot boom and
Surely you don't expect a 4 element on a 26 foot boom to be competition for a 4 element SteppIR on a 32 or 34 foot , do you? I was just leveling the playing field by taking the boom from a 205BA and
I dont expect anything however its totally wrong calling that antenna a 204BA, its something else but no 204BA, its a "former" 204BA. /Jim SM2EKM -- Bob Maser wrote: Surely you don't expect a 4 eleme