On 5/4/00 4:48 PM, Dmitri Bagno (RW3FO) at bagno@mai.ru wrote:
>Actually, I understand the following when reading the rules:
>1) if "quads" is a single installation able to operate on three
>bands, if all of single-band resonant elements are in essential
>mutual coupling with each other, hence "quads" IS a tribander;
The key element in the "quad" example was that the "quad" in question had
multiple feedlines, which essentially eliminated it from the WPX
definition of a tribander. As someone else pointed out, there are Yagi
antennas that have multiple feedlines as well, and it is equally possible
to design a quad which used a single feedline.
>2) any [quite long] travelling wave antenna can be considered as
>linear array with consequent feed; moreover, both rhombic and
>V-beam are often considered as evolution of 4 (or more) "single
>element" Beverages [configured in specific manner to reduce
>sidelobes]; so rhombic and V-beam antennas are NOT single
>element antennas.
I disagree here. A V-beam has no more elements than an inverted V. A
Rhombic has no more elements than a full-wave loop. The only difference
is a matter of total length of the element (in wavelengths).
For that matter, a single long-wire antenna would certainly fit in the S
part of the TS category, but a long enough and high enough wire has
significant gain over a dipole or vertical.
>My oppinion: perhaps, some examples of antenna types of "T"
>and "S" are necessary to show in rules or in some supplement
>to clear up T/S part.
I don't think the rule needs to change -- as written, it is very concise.
Perhaps it doesn't exclude all possible configuration that people feel
need to be excluded (it also excludes some that perhaps should be
included), but its still a pretty good rule as it stands.
Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: aa4lr@radio.org
Quote: "Boot, you transistorized tormentor! Boot!"
-- Archibald Asparagus, VeggieTales
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|