Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] Multi-band dipoles

To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Multi-band dipoles
From: Bill Aycock <baycock2@centurytel.net>
Reply-to: baycock2@centurytel.net
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 11:18:24 -0500
List-post: <towertalk@contesting.com">mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
Joe--
You mention "actually tested" and "actually measured" in your post. Who 
did this, how was it done, and where is it published? I have never heard 
that these antennas were very good, and would like to hear any thing 
different.
Bill--W4BSG

On 4/21/2011 9:31 PM, K3WRY@aol.com wrote:
> All interested hams:
>
> With many opinions about the B&  W folded dipoles, one needs to  understand
> the design and actual tested operations of this antenna design.
> It actually is quieter on receive, and the loss is only higher when the SWR
>   rises regardless any band or frequency operation.
> Therefore, if the SWR is kept low,  the transmitter efficiency of the
> antenna is actually measured, the actual radiated power can be very  high with
> minimal power being actually lost through the  resistor.
> The higher the SWR, the less efficient the antenna and consequently more
> power is lost through the resistor.
>
> Regards,
> Dr Joe Palsa
> k3wry
>
>
> No trees were destroyed in  the sending of this message, however, a
> significant number of electrons were  terribly inconvenienced
>
>
> In a message dated 4/21/2011 4:39:50 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> steve@karinya.net writes:
>
> The  military love them because they value frequency agility over
> efficiency.
>
> Cebik's analysis put the power in the terminating resistor  at somewhere
> between half and 90% of the applied power, depending on the  band.
>
> 73,
> Steve G3TXQ
>
>
> On 21/04/2011 21:30, Grant Saviers  wrote:
>> I had one of these elevated resistors briefly in 1980.  It  was very very
>> quiet at both ends.
>>
>> Might be ok for  quick GOTA, emergency, or NVIS, that's what it seems the
>> military  wanted it for.
>>
>> Grant KZ1W
>>
>> On 4/21/2011 12:36  PM, David Gilbert wrote:
>>> By all accounts I've read, the B&W  folded dipole is indeed broadband.
>>> Since it has a relatively small  fixed "tuning network", that can only
>>> mean it has significant loss  relative to a normal dipole.  Estimates
>>> I've read vary  between one and two S-units.
>>>
>>> By all accounts I've  read, it is a "quiet" antenna on receive.  Since
>>> noise  rejection can only come from pattern or polarity discrimination
>>>   and the B&W antenna has no more of either of those than does a  standard
>>> dipole, that again means it has significant loss.   The antenna is
>>> probably just as quiet on the other end as it is on  yours.
>>>
>>> Dave    AB7E
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> From: "Fred  Serota"<fserota@msn.com>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2011  1:30 PM
>>>>   To:<jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>;<towertalk@contesting.com>
>>>>   Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Multi-band  dipoles
>>>>
>>>>> Suggest trying Barker and  Willamson's folded dipole. They have three
>>>>> or 4 varieties,  some made of stainless wire for very tough climates.
>>>>> The  longest is approximately 120' and fives a flat SWR under 2:1  for
>>>>> 160-6 meters. Due to built in matching does not need a  tuner. This
>>>>> antenna has a special name, I have forgotten.  Can be ordered direct or
>>>>> I, thing, through HRO and  AES.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mine is hung as an inverted V and  works out very well.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fred,  K3BHX
>>>   _______________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>   _______________________________________________
>>> TowerTalk mailing  list
>>> TowerTalk@contesting.com
>>>   http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>>>
>>   _______________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>>   _______________________________________________
>> TowerTalk mailing  list
>> TowerTalk@contesting.com
>>   http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk  mailing  list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
>
> .
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
>
_______________________________________________



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

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