How you use that stack will depend on where you are, too. If you're in a
position to do a lot of running, the stack will offer an advantage because
of a better "foot print". If you can only run some for short periods of
time, then you may find that ONE of the antenna in the stack is optimal for
getting through a pileup. Or you cna split the stack to cover different
directions and give your rotors a break. Think about the amount of time you
could save if you didn't have to wait for a rotor to come around. Finally,
the difference between big antennas and small antennas will depend on
conditions. Last weekend's ARRL SSB contest offered astonishingly poor
conditions for us. Signals were very weak and hard to work. Every .1db
counted. If we were at the top of the cycle and everyone is loud, what's 1
or 2 db?
You can't have too many antennas.
73 Steve K0SR
----- Original Message -----
From: "IK2DZN - Claudio Astorri" <ik2dzn@astorri.it>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 11:07 PM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] R: Does size matter?
Hi contesters,
I do agree with Bill. Let's take antenna heigth, for example.
I had a TH7DXS (a very common trapped antenna...) at the top of a 67 meter
tower in the early 90's.
The performance at low angles was simply outstanding.
I could work at 59 many US West Coast stations and Japanese ones via long
path from Italy while hams in my area with similiar antennas couldn't even
listen to them.
High gain from a large or even stacked system is good news only if the
antenna heigth is such to push to the low angles you require.
Have a nice day.
Claudio Astorri, IK2DZN
-----Messaggio originale-----
Da: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] Per conto di Bill Coleman
Inviato: giovedì 10 marzo 2005 19.37
A: cq-contest@contesting.com
Oggetto: [CQ-Contest] Does size matter?
All these accounts of monstrous antenna arrays are very impressive. My
question is - are they truly necessary? What is the advantage they convey?
Does the advantage justify the cost over some smaller array?
At home, I can demonstrate the difference even a small tribander at 15m (50
feet) has over a multi-band vertical or a low dipole. Yet when I travel to
NQ4I's M/M, I don't see as big a difference with his excellent antenna farm
and my modest tribander. Surely it is there, and is reflected in the scores,
but it doesn't have as big an impact psycologically as you'd think.
During the CQ WW Phone, NQ4I's 10m stations consisted of a three-high 5/5/5,
with the top rotatable, and the middle steerable between EU and JA. The
other station had 6/6 to JA, 8/6 to EU with the top steerable and a 6 ele
fixed on VK/ZL, and another antenna on the carribean / south america.
You'd think we'd use the bigger stack to run, right? Actually, the second
station was far superior. The three-high stack to EU was ineffective, but
the 2-high stack worked great. In fact, the 8 element at 125' was the best
antenna of the bunch.
So, isn't one antenna that is just right better than a huge stack of
mediocre antennas?
Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: aa4lr@arrl.net
Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!"
-- Wilbur Wright, 1901
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|