In a message dated 7/27/01 5:22:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time, w8ji@akorn.net
writes:
> So you see, stacking distance has absolutely nothing to do with
> boom length! Optimum stacking distance is a function of how
> narrow the original pattern is....or where the minor lobes are that
> you want to get rid of.
snipididuda....
> The narrower each
> antennas pattern, the wider stacking distance becomes. It has
> nothing at all to do with boom length.
> 73, Tom W8JI
Hmmm,
and narrower antenna pattern has nothing to do with (longer) boom length?
Some contradiction going on here (again).
Isn't it a bit farfetched to compare stacked dipoles (zero boom) to typical
multielement antenna (bigger boom, bigger gain/narrower pattern, etc.)
situations?
With stacked Razors (1.2 wave booms) I used about 1.2 wave spacing, based on
experiences of others, mainly VHF crowd (no software back then), worked like
the fine tuned Stradivarius.
Yuri, K3BU
-----
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
|