Hi Ken,
Be glad to. It took me a while to get mine working, found some basic
things I needed
to do and it now works very well.
First a question. How far is your flag from the house and also
an antenna tower or other metal structures ? I had to detune my tower
it is only 40 feet away from
the Flag. After this we can go over the construction of the Flag and
its feed system issues like eliminating
common mode interference. Maybe it would be best to discuss this
directly rather than the reflector ?
I can be long winded. hihi
Bob
K6UJ
On 4/23/16 10:42 AM, Ken K6MR wrote:
Interesting comments about the WF. I recently built one and so far it has been
a complete failure.
Care to share the details?
Ken K6MR
From: Bob K6UJ<mailto:k6uj@pacbell.net>
Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2016 10:30
To: topband@contesting.com<mailto:topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: The band sans noise
Bill,
Sounds great ! hihihi A lot cheaper than a Pixel too !
Until now I have kept my comments to myself about the Pixel.
I had a Pixel for a short time and sold it.
At the time I had electrical hash from one direction due to loose
hardware on a power pole.
It took forever for our utility company to fix it. I have a Waller Flag
for receive on 160 and it
was very effective at nulling out the power pole noise. I read all the
rave reviews on the Pixel and
thought it would outperform the Flag for nulling out the noise and was
also curious how it compared
to the flag on picking up 160 DX signals. The Pixel did provide a nice
null from the power pole noise
but not nearly as deep of a null as the Waller Flag. On discriminating
160 DX from the band noise level
it was very poor indeed. The Waller Flag way out performed the Pixel.
I could hear DX stations with the
flag and could not hear them at all on the pixel when receiving stations
close to the noise level.
The Pixel would be suited for someone in an apartment or with a small
lot and doesn't have the room
for a larger receiving antenna like the Waller Flag. It is a compromise
receiving antenna but we have
to work with what we have as far as room for antennas.
73,
Bob
K6UJ
On 4/23/16 9:45 AM, william radice wrote:
:::: I have an antenna of very similar design and performance. It is an
all aluminum lawn chair on a pole.
BILL
On 4/22/2016 1:42 PM, Rob Atkinson wrote:
Throw bricks all you want to the end of time but you'll never change
the fact that we tested that antenna and saw its performance first
hand; The preamp was designed by Jack Smith at CliftonLabs..I'm sure
he'll enjoy reading your comments and get a good laugh.
73
Rob
K5UJ
On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 11:26 AM, JC <n4is@comcast.net> wrote:
SORRY am not getting into this PR.. PIXEL loop is a low RDF and LOW
performance receiving antenna, it is really snake oil.
I'm out of this discussion.
Regards
JC
In tests, the Pixel magnetic loop provided at least 20 dB null off the
sides. From my experience, that is much better "filtering" than what
would be had with a horizontal loop. Of course it isn't all in the
antenna itself--a great deal of the success comes from the special preamp
designed for use with the antenna.
<<<
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
|