There are times during storms that my upper antennas have heavy static and
the lower ones are much quieter. Perhaps your antenna is low and less prone
to static than your buddies?
John KK9A
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard M. Gillingham" <rmoodyg@bellsouth.net>
To: <N2TK@arrl.net>; "'Tom Rauch'" <w8ji@contesting.com>;
<towertalk@contesting.com>; "'Bill Ogden'" <ogden@us.ibm.com>
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 15:20
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Quad vs SteppIR
I can't speak for snow static, living in south Florida, but the steppir is
less prone to precip static because (I think) of the fact that the elements
are enclosed in a "radome"... When some of my local buddies are complaining
of precip static during rain storms, I don't hear it. That's not to say you
won't hear static crashes from lightning. There's plenty of that down here.
(grin)
There are certainly more knowledgable folks on here, but that's my
experience.
Good luck,
Gil, W1RG
3el up since Aug 2002.
----- Original Message -----
From: "N2TK" <tony.kaz@verizon.net>
To: "'Tom Rauch'" <w8ji@contesting.com>; <towertalk@contesting.com>; "'Bill
Ogden'" <ogden@us.ibm.com>
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 11:13 AM
Subject: RE: [TowerTalk] Quad vs SteppIR
> Hi Tom,
>
> When I had a quad and monobanders, the quad was always quieter from snow
> static than the monobanders. Was wondering if the SteppIR would be quieter
> than a regualr aluminum beam during a snow storm since the snow would be
> in
> contact with fiberglass instead of aluminum? Or would the static charge be
> the same regardless of material?
> Tnx
> N2TK, Tony
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: towertalk-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:towertalk-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Tom Rauch
> Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 10:54 AM
> To: towertalk@contesting.com; Bill Ogden
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Quad vs SteppIR
>
>> I am wondering if a 3 element SteppIR would provide any
> noticable
>> improvements in my situation. The SteppIR is probably
> easier to handle and
>> the 180 degree switch appears to be a very nice feature,
> but is this
>> sufficient to justify switching? Does anyone have
> experiences about quad
>> vs SteppIR?
>
> Hi Bill,
>
> This is all based on "how it works" data, not an actual comparison. I've
> had
> quads and Yagis, and the SteppIR is nothing but a Yagi.
>
> If both your old quad and the proposed SteppIR antennas both have
> reasonable
> efficiency, you can expect performance to be roughly proportional to boom
> length, assuming the number of elements is nearly optimum for any given
> boom
> length. This means the SteppIR should at least equal if not actually
> improve
> performance as long as it has a longer boom. My bet is that it would
> actually improve your system a few dB for both receiving and transmitting.
>
> I almost hate to say this, but an occasional reminder is due from time to
> time. A quad has no real gain advantage over a similar size Yagi. The
> original "2dB" thing came from flawed measurements of a scaled model by a
> W2
> and W6 long ago, and once it was in print that was it...it took on a life
> of
> its own. At some heights a small quad antenna can show a little advantage
> (perhaps 1 dB) and at other heights a slight loss over a similar boom
> length
> yagi. Overall they are about equal, although for some reason long quads
> did
> not fair well in actual measurements (Wayne Overbeck N6NB and Dave Bell
> W6AQ, CQ Magazine, May 1982).
>
> Another quad myth is capture area, but physical aperture is not the same
> as
> electrical aperture or "capture area".
> Capture area only relates to gain and frequency, so any antenna with the
> same gain on the same frequency has the same capture area! That's true if
> one is a big box, and the other is a small single plane element. Capture
> area also does not determine S/N ratio, so it a moot point anyway.
>
> Directivity sets receiving, not gain or capture area (more correctly
> called
> effective aperture). I would expect the SteppIR to receive better, because
> it should have better directivity. The exception might be in times of
> inclement weather, since the quad generally has less of a corona
> (P-static) problem. In the few quads I've had here, that was the only
> advantage I ever saw when comparing them to similar size Yagi's.
>
> 73 Tom
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless
> Weather Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with
> any
> questions and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless
> Weather Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with
> any questions and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
_______________________________________________
See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless
Weather Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any
questions and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
_______________________________________________
See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather
Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any questions
and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|