To: | "Kevin Normoyle" <knormoyle@surfnetusa.com> |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: [TowerTalk] 80m dipole with open-sleeve parasitic |
From: | "Rick Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com> |
Reply-to: | richard@karlquist.com |
Date: | Wed, 19 Jan 2011 12:22:07 -0800 |
List-post: | <towertalk@contesting.com">mailto:towertalk@contesting.com> |
These types of schemes (of which there are many) are generally inferior to what you can to with a lumped element network at the feedpoint. Plus with the LE network, the antenna is ordinary wire, and the feedline is ordinary coax. I think people gravitate towards the schemes like this one and the many "bazooka" designs either because they think there is some magic, or don't want to deal with inductors. QST had some articles on lumped element networks many years ago, showing they were clearly superior. Rick N6RK _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing list TowerTalk@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [TowerTalk] Fwd: current balance in ladder line?, jimlux |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [TowerTalk] 80m dipole with open-sleeve parasitic, knormoyle@surfnetusa.com |
Previous by Thread: | [TowerTalk] 80m dipole with open-sleeve parasitic, Kevin Normoyle |
Next by Thread: | Re: [TowerTalk] 80m dipole with open-sleeve parasitic, Grant Saviers |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |