[TowerTalk] quads

[wa4dou@juno.com]

Bravo Tom!
  I too, grew up with amateur radio, hearing and reading all the stories
about how quads were magic. Who couldn't fall in love with an antenna
whose attributes were so touted? Along the way, i had occasion to observe
that quads did seem to have some interesting properties, sometimes. But
so did yagis!  I've had a couple of quads on 6 meters and a quad on 10.
All were 2 elements, tuned for best front to back ratio.They all
outperformed 2 element yagis, slightly, when it comes to gain. They all
were outperformed slightly, by 3 element yagis. In recent years i let go
of my old ideas about quads. The quad was created to serve a need. It did
not suffer from corona in a case where yagis did. I personally feel that
we all benefit tremendously when fact debunks myth. After all, amateur
radio was never about "operating", its a technical undertaking. The real
substance of amateur radio is in the technical understanding, learning,
experimenting, investigation. The communicating is really just the means
to perform tests and proof of performance. Before the hardcore contesters
become offended, please allow me to state that there is certainly room
for others with differing views. I made my views quite clear, several
weeks ago, as to my perception of the value of a db or 2 or even 4. Sure
they all help, slightly, maybe, in this or that circumstance. Ionospheric
propagation is a "great leveler" of signals. I have rarely observed a
case where i would likely have made a contact with a db or 2 or 4 more
signal strength, either way. Statistically, the benefit, has to help,
somewhere, somehow, some day, some way. If a contester feels the need for
"more", then he probably needs it. I don't think anyone will argue with
the concept of "maximizing your use" of whatever you are fortunate enough
to have.  73 Roy Lincoln WA4DOU
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
--

On Fri, 26 May 2000 07:10:20 -0400 "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>
writes:
> 
> > The discussion seems to have gotten around to quads and it seems 
> they take
> > a bad rap every time.
> 
> Why is it that when an antenna is discussed factually, rather than 
> emotionally or empirically, we consider it giving an antenna a "bad 
> rap?
> 


________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

--
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