I would expect two factors at play. The main factor is probably the
large surface area of metal up there to collect the static. The other is
the broad bandwidth. A better solution in terms of precipitation static,
performance, size, weight, etc., would be a SteppIR. I suspect that
even a 2 element SteppIR would be similar in performance, and a 3
element much better. A 4 el would replace the whole setup with better
performance and no interaction (and a thinner wallet, of course).
Larry N8LP
John Wagner wrote:
>Just to add my two cents.I had a 4 el monobander and a 3 el two band
>trapped beam on the same mast, the 3 el above the 4 el. at 60 ft. No
>noise under any situation. I replaced the 3 el with a T-7 LP, same
>mast, same 4 el monobander underneath, same spacing, etc. Very noisy
>in precip, variable with intensity of precip. Snow worse than rain. It
>makes the 4 el nearly unusable as well. Nearby wire antennas are
>quiet.
>
>One more "data" point. Good discussion.
>
>73 John W8JJW
>_______________________________________________
>
>See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless
>Weather Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any
>questions and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
>
>_______________________________________________
>TowerTalk mailing list
>TowerTalk@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather
Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any questions
and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|