[CQ-Contest] Does size matter?

[Bill Coleman]

All these accounts of monstrous antenna arrays are very impressive. My 
question is - are they truly necessary? What is the advantage they 
convey? Does the advantage justify the cost over some smaller array?

At home, I can demonstrate the difference even a small tribander at 15m 
(50 feet) has over a multi-band vertical or a low dipole. Yet when I 
travel to NQ4I's M/M, I don't see as big a difference with his 
excellent antenna farm and my modest tribander. Surely it is there, and 
is reflected in the scores, but it doesn't have as big an impact 
psycologically as you'd think.

During the CQ WW Phone, NQ4I's 10m stations consisted of a three-high 
5/5/5, with the top rotatable, and the middle steerable between EU and 
JA. The other station had 6/6 to JA, 8/6 to EU with the top steerable 
and a 6 ele fixed on VK/ZL, and another antenna on the carribean / 
south america.

You'd think we'd use the bigger stack to run, right? Actually, the 
second station was far superior. The three-high stack to EU was 
ineffective, but the 2-high stack worked great. In fact, the 8 element 
at 125' was the best antenna of the bunch.

So, isn't one antenna that is just right better than a huge stack of 
mediocre antennas?


Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL        Mail: aa4lr at arrl.net
Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!"
             -- Wilbur Wright, 1901