TT: If I recall correctly, Mike and Jim have their own range, with the unit under test on one tower, and an HP spectrum analyser connected to a dipole on another tower, many wavelengths distant. Towe
Well, the many wavelengths distant is already a problem. Measurements would be much more accurate just out of the near field. I don't know why anyone would measure an antenna in the null of the patt
Here is how the testing is described on the SteppIR site... (http://www.steppir.com/, click the Field Test button) -- "We started by placing a reference dipole at one end of an antenna range and a re
Not even a step attenuater in the circuit. On top of that using the log scale on a 141T spectrum analyzer! Lucky to get within a couple of db with that setup alone. I am not saying their gain figures
I believe someone else said they used a step attenuator. Secondly, they were doing differential measurements between a dipole and a SteppIR, not absolute measurements of power. In any event, the 141
know The problem is people measure something and then several hours, weeks, or days later measure something else without having a reference standard. Worse yet they compared what they measure to som
I agree with Rick here. They were doing a classic substitution measurement, and the required dynamic range was around 10dB (i.e. the difference in gain between the reference dipole and the AUT), at l
I was looking at the picture and drawing of the test setup on the web site. They do not show any type attenuator in the drawing. Even making a differential measurement, trying to read to 1db on a log
I agree with Tom here. Splitting hairs over a db or two is not realistic. You have no way of really knowing. And the manufacturer probably doesn't either. I have always looked at boom length. If they
This thread about SteppIR gain has been enlightening for gain figures published by antenna manufacturers. I especially enjoyed reading the enlightening posts from Tom Rauch. I considered buying Stepp
You don't use 10dB/div. You use 1 or 2 dB/div. You don't use the vernier attenuator at all. The 141 is a red herring. Unknown antenna range effects are the real issue. Rick N6RK (who owns three 141
Hi Rick, Exactly my point, you need more resolution than the 10 db. Not to start another argument but I also have a 141 it is a 141A but has I presume the same IF unit, the 8552a. It does not have a
Yes, except that as someone else aptly pointed out, they dont have to compromise gain for bandwidth. The other thing that could happen is since all the elements are variable, they COULD have one set
dont have to elements are variable, another for F/R. But Ty, the point is: 1.) the difference between the two is so minor no one should really care anyway 2.) at maximum gain losses in the connectio
How can there be no difference between a 3 element SteppIR and a "2" element C3???? Seems to me that the 3 element will win every time over a 2 element antenna...... 73, Ted K2QMF ___________________
I didn't measure the gain, only observed S-meter when receiving from each located at same station. Keith NM5G How can there be no difference between a 3 element SteppIR and a "2" element C3???? Seems