[TowerTalk] . Re: 2006 Top Ten Chutzpah Awards

Keith Dutson kdutson at sbcglobal.net
Wed Aug 23 14:11:29 EDT 2006

>It is simply not true that a larger antenna transmits better than a smaller

That's a pretty broad statement to make.  If so, how come all the big guns
use very big antennas?

73, Keith NM5G 

-----Original Message-----
From: towertalk-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:towertalk-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bill Ogden
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 9:21 AM
To: towertalk at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] . Re: 2006 Top Ten Chutzpah Awards

The BW price seems a little high, considering they are advertising in a ham
magazine. However, please think a little before claiming it is an almost
useless antenna. I believe it consumes up to half the input power in the
resistor. Half is 3 db.  On the classic scale, this is half an S unit
although it is probably closer to one S unit on most receivers.  There are
many instances of communication, ham and otherwise, where trading one S unit
for easy setup and wide frequency matching provides a reasonable tradeoff.
For receiving on the HF bands, efficiency is not required since the
inefficiency of the antenna reduces both signal and atmospheric noise

It is simply not true that a larger antenna transmits better than a smaller
one. Provided one can load the antenna without encountering excessive losses
there is little difference between a large and small antenna in terms of
transmitting efficiency. (Direction control is a different matter, of
course.) As an antenna becomes smaller (in terms of wavelength) it becomes
more of a challenge to match it to the transmission line and transmitter and
*this* factor can be a significant limitation.

I do not have either antenna and am not considering either one. I do like to
avoid, or at least identify, old wives tales.

Bill - W2WO


TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk at contesting.com

More information about the TowerTalk mailing list