Topband: 60' or 70' spacing on Hi-Z 4/8 element RX array

[StellarCAT]

Thanks Bob,

70’ is what Lee use to offer ... I had a 4 sq with those dimensions (it was stolen out of a self storage unit however). I believe Lee would do cabling for either 70’ or 60’. My main focus is still 160 with 80 as the second ... but I don’t want to neglect 40 as spring/summer/fall static can be horrendous. So the total power isn’t an issue?.... please explain to me what exactly it means! So ALL signals – noise and signal are reduced by this same amount – 6.6 db? And assuming the preamp doesn’t add any noise then it would be – the same? 

or put another way – say I have 2 of these – an 80’ on a side and a 60’ on a side ... at the same location (but not interacting, or I can magically swap them out)... what if any change is there in the headphones?! That to me is the bottom line and what I’ve just not had an answer on yet. 

g.



From: Bob Kupps 
Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 1:19 PM
To: StellarCAT ; topband at contesting.com 
Subject: Re: Topband: 60' or 70' spacing on Hi-Z 4/8 element RX array

Hi Gary 

We plan to set up ours with 60' spacing for best 40m performance, and with just 10' elements.. When it is done we will be able to compare the performance on 80 and 160 with our monoband 8 circles. I agree that power gain is not important, particularly in our high QRN environment. AFAIK 70' spacing is not an option however I could be wrong. We hope to have it done before the CW test because we lost our 80m 8 circle relay box due to water damage and a replacement won't be ready in time so we should have some info for you soon...73 Bob HS0ZIA

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android


  On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 17:29, StellarCAT
  <rxdesign at ssvecnet.com> wrote:
  I just purchased a HiZ 8 element array ... and am trying to decide which way I want to go. I want a bit better performance on 40 than the standard 80’ spacing provides (lobes are quite high angled) ... and going down to 70’ improves 40 a good bit – going to 60’ even more so (and improves, from an RDF standpoint, both 160 and 80!) ... I’ve modeled all conditions. I see the Total power however suffers a good bit when going down in size due to lost ‘aperture’ effect ... on 160 meters going from 80/20 (height of vertical) down to 70’/20 is a –3db loss in total power ... going to a 60’/20 is –6.6db. Lee assures me that this won’t have any real effect here unless my ... if I understand him correctly, local noise is very low – which it isn’t it turns out ... and I was wondering how others using smaller spacing, either 60’ or 70’, like the overall performance on 160 especially as well as 80? 

  thanks for your time,

  Gary 
  K9RX

  [this is not to second guess Lee, this is rather just a ‘comfort’ request ... I am still at a bit of a loss when he says it will be a loss of –6.6db going from 80 to 60 foot and yet I won’t notice the difference! Not sure what the real world implications of that are in the headphones. This will be using their new Plus6 preamps]
  _________________
  Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband