Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] Skyhawk, KT36XA, opinions requested

To: K7LXC@aol.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Skyhawk, KT36XA, opinions requested
From: "Robert G. Strickland" <rcrgs@verizon.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 00:24:55 +0000
List-post: <mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
Steven...

Thanks for this and your other direct message.

Another "issue" comes up that I have seen here and there on the reflector, 
but I'm still not sure about the answer.

I live in Syracuse NY, and we have our share of acid rain. It seems that 
both antennas - and others - make use of sliding aluminum tubing 
connections. What is to prevent oxidation of the connecting surfaces with 
resultant deterioration of RF performance? Can this deterioration, if 
present, be abated by using some sort of conductive joint compound during 
assembly?

Concerning the KT36XA, it seems that the elements are not spaced using the 
more modern element interleaving techniques based on computer modeling. On 
the other hand, the antenna clearly uses sophisticated element length 
adjustment using stub sections and, I imagine, capacity loading. It has a 
longer boom. So, does this represent "one way" of achieving optimum 
multi-band performance, or is the uniform spacing inferior by design to 
those tribanders using interleaved element spacing?

You can tell I'm new to yagis. About quads I can speak at some length <g>.

Thanks to all who are contributing to this thread. All comments have been 
most helpful. Great group.

...robert

At 10/09/2007 07:31, K7LXC@aol.com wrote:
>In a message dated 10/7/2007 9:39:38 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, 
>towertalk-request@contesting.com writes:
> >  I'm thinking of replacing my quad with either a Skyhawk or M2's KT36XA
>
>     Sounds like you should take a gander at our tribander comparison 
> report from 
> <http://www.championradio.com/publications.html>www.championradio.com/publications.html.
>  
> The SkyHawk and KT34XA were both tested. The KLM KT34XA had a couple of 
> anomalies that may or may not be present in the 36 (methinks not). And 
> Mike Stall said that the 36 has a few more tenths of a dB gain but not 
> anything significant so I think you can make some valid inferences from 
> the 34 data. And it's only seventeen bucks plus s/h.
>
>Cheers,
>Steve    K7LXC
>Champion Radio Products
>Cell: 206-890-4188
>
>
>
>
>
>----------
>See what's new at <http://www.aol.com?NCID=AOLCMP00300000001170>AOL.com 
>and <http://www.aol.com/mksplash.adp?NCID=AOLCMP00300000001169>Make AOL 
>Your Homepage.

Robert G. Strickland PhD ABPH - KE2WY
rcrgs@verizon.net.usa
Syracuse, New York  USA

_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>