VHFcontesting
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [VHFcontesting] Rover Antenna Mounting Hardware

To: n3_kkm <n3_kkm@embarqmail.com>
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] Rover Antenna Mounting Hardware
From: Nate Duehr <nate@natetech.com>
Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 00:14:50 -0600
List-post: <vhfcontesting@contesting.com">mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
On May 27, 2009, at 11:58 PM, n3_kkm wrote:

> For those of you who rove with beam antennas I'm interested to know if
> you use the standard antenna mounting hardware (U bolts, Nuts,  
> Wrenches,
> etc.) or is there another technique that's quicker/easier?

Yup.  Lots of dead bugs on the antennas after a weekend of driving  
back-roads in farm country, but no damage to the antennas.  Tighten  
them up good, and prep for the worst... have the wrenches necessary  
handy in a baggie or toolbox in the vehicle, and don't build your  
stack in such a way that you can't LAY IT DOWN to tighten something...  
if something comes loose.  Never had it happen, but I thought about  
what I would do by myself without a 10' ladder to get up there in the  
back-country on the fixed mast... so the design was done with an old  
hitch-mounted bike rack that could have a pin removed to lay it down  
and repair an antenna if necessary.

On 6m -- I use loops... a beam would be nice, but isn't in the budget,  
nor would it survive @ 75 MPH, I don't think.  Most rover photos I've  
seen either have loops for 6m, or have masts that fold over for  
"motion" and then have to be put back up at each stop.  The fixed  
mast, as long as you know you have the overhead clearance and are  
smart enough not to drive under an overhang at a truck stop in the  
middle of the night when you're tired... is simpler and more in the  
KISS principal.  Plus, if you're pointed the right way while in  
motion, you still have your gain antennas, and can work folks.

(I-76 from Sterling to Denver is *generally* pointed at the Denver  
Metro area, and you can work a bunch of folks while you're driving  
"back in" to Denver that way.)

One year I used a log periodic for everything except 6m & 10 GHz, and  
wasn't super-impressed with the performance, but it worked.  Had 2m,  
222, 432, 902, and 1.2 on that antenna via switches.

Everything was the "expected" 3dB weaker or more... and dealing with  
all the switches to hook multiple rigs to the single antenna was a  
pain in the butt.  I decided the complexity and "mess" of individual  
band antennas performed a lot better the prior year, and I'd go back  
to that.

Plus most antenna switches are lossy at those frequencies also...  
nothing out there today is rated for use above 432.  I had decided  
that I would disconnect 902 and/or 1.2 from the antenna switch and  
compare if I was having any problems making contacts with them, but  
the contacts were made without drama, and I never bothered to measure  
or check the difference.  The LPDA was quite unhappy on 432, and on  
Day 2, I quickly slapped a 432 antenna on the mast and moved it off of  
the LPDA because it was driving me nuts.

But, if someone were trying to get started relatively inexpensively on  
a whole bunch of bands, since bands are multipliers, and gain toward  
the horizon is better than none... one of the broadbanded LPDA's by  
itself on a mast, isn't a bad way to start, compared to verticals on a  
beginning rover outing.

--
Nate Duehr, WY0X
nate@natetech.com




_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting

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