[TowerTalk] Re:Antennex and it's CFA Coverage

[K7GCO@aol.com]

In a message dated 21.02.00 12:28:39 Pacific Standard Time, 
charlie.ocker@tellabs.com writes:

<< K7GCO@aol.com wrote:
 >  Remember: Chip Margelli won a DX
 > Contest with an AEA Iso-Loop.  K7GCO
 
 No, he won CW Sweepstakes operating from KP4.  1994 or 1995, I think. 
 Chip also had the use of a full sized antennas for 40 and 80.
 
 Quite a feat, but not exactly a dx contest....
 73, Charlie  N9CO
  >>
I stand corrected, it was a SS contest but I made my point how well small 
antennas can work.  I've been typing with a bad head cold and it affects my 
memory--that's a good excuse.  I have another example on 160M I did.  I used 
a 40M horizontally oriented quad loop 20' off the ground fed with a 1/2 wave 
of open wire line.  I have a sneaky way to load it on all of 80/75M also with 
no big tuner.  It's a folded 1/2 wave on this band voltage fed and is still a 
broadside pattern bouncing off the ground for gain up, up and away.  A great 
antenna.  On 160M the wire path from inside the shack from one wire to the 
other was 1/2 wave now. With the Hi-voltage areas parallel to each other for 
1/8 wave.  If I could match the Z at the end of the balanced feed line I'd 
have the center 1/4 wave section of the Hi-Current Area--doing it's thing.  
At about 7 PM in the summer evening running 35W low level 160M AM, I was 
working a station about 30 miles away.  I got a better report than a station 
running a Collins KW-1 of full high level modulation using a L antenna about 
the same distance away.  His angle of radiation was certainly not 
optimum--mine was.  He doesn't like to talk about that as he had 15 dB on me 
and better audio. I have a KW-1 here but was unable to get it on the air real 
fast.  
   
I recommended hams do research on the CFA to smoke out all I could on it.  I 
got replies and one just today that gives good info.  Some BC Engineers 
actually went to Egypt and weren't permitted to use FS meters on the site but 
did elsewhere and it was a bit weaker than it should have been.  That's good 
reserach.  I'm surprised that they were allowed to inspect the CFA if it 
wasn't a good antenna.  That's kind of dumb.  I gave them more intellectual 
credit.  It has to work better to sell--the main goal.  The investors won't 
allow it. You can't sell a total hoax--very long to the BC Inustry although 
I've seen some go on to the hams for over 30 years.  There isn't anything in 
these 2 antennas that the designers could do more wrong for the tight budget 
hams. I'd still like to try it and another variation of it.  We shall see.  
I've alerted the CFA detectives on TT and see what the latest AntenneX has 
they will admit to.  I'll be tough and threaten to cancel my sub.  

I'm going on 160M tonight and see who I can embarrass with 35W with 1/4 wave 
of very smart and Hi-Current RF wire.  I will put it in Eznec also.  With 
this cold I have, 12 hours a day on the computer answering E-mails is not a 
good idea which I admit.  But these antenna issues are important. 
K7GCO


--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
Submissions:              towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-towertalk@contesting.com
Search:                   http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm