[TenTec] Rhombics

[Rick - NJ0IP / DJ0IP]

I disagree.
It depends on how on how you define "efficient".
I learned a long time ago that a radio can be too sensitive.
Ten-Tec has been building radios with less sensitivity on the low bands than
on the high bands for a long time.
Sensitivity is overvalued.

What matters is signal to noise difference.

On my 65' vertical, often on 80 and nearly always on 160, the noise is
louder than the signal.
I haven't done it at this QTH but I have done it at half a dozen contest
QTH's where we had Beverages.
Switch to the Beverage and suddenly the DX station is a few S-Units louder
than the noise.
So if we define efficiency as the ability to distinguish useful signal from
noise, then the Beverage is very efficient.
The vertical is very inefficient.

After all, we're in this game to work stations, not to measure their
ultimate voltage on some instrument.
I contend my definition is more appropriate than S-meter readings!

73
Rick
-----Original Message-----
From: tentec-bounces at contesting.com [mailto:tentec-bounces at contesting.com]
On Behalf Of Richards
Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2010 5:41 PM
To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Rhombics

Yes, true.   One consideration is the fact it is a fairly in efficient 
receiving antenna as well.

I guess it's just so quiet, signal-to-noise-wise that it makes a good 
receiving antenna, but that same inefficiency holds it back on 
transmitting efficiency.

One of the happier paradoxes of life!Happy Trails.

====================  James  /  K8JHR ===================


On 12/5/2010 6:09 PM, JOSEPH DAVIS wrote:
> OK on Beverage Eff.  Most use Beverage to receive and vertical or
> dipole to transmit. I am still thinking why the Beverage is so
> ineffecient for transmitt.  jjdavis
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec