| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 28.12.08 20:02l 1112 Lines 38345 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 62245_CX2SA
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V3 676
Path: IZ3LSV<IK2XDE<F5GOV<F4BWT<F1BBI<CX2SA
Sent: 081228/1856Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:62245 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:62245_CX2SA
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Fw: ELK or ARROW (Gary "Joe" Mayfield)
2. give the newbie the full story on ELK and ARROW please
(Jim Danehy)
3. Re: give the newbie the full story on ELK and ARROW please
(Andrew Glasbrenner)
4. Elk or Arrow (Jim Leder)
5. Re: give the newbie the full story on ELK and ARROW please
(n3tl@xxxxxxxxx.xxxx
6. Mahalo (dukenuke@xxxx.xxxx
7. Re: Building an EggBeater (Alan Sieg WB5RMG)
8. Re: Building an EggBeater (PE0SAT)
9. Re: give the newbie the full story on ELK and ARROW please
(Jim Danehy)
10. Re: Fw: ELK or ARROW (Edward Cole)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 10:00:51 -0600
From: "Gary \"Joe\" Mayfield" <gary_mayfield@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Fw: ELK or ARROW
To: "'Jim Leder'" <k8cxm@xxxx.xxx>, "'Amsat'" <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <COL0-DAV85E4EC8A51561AD08B0A28AE90@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
http://www.csvhfs.org/ant/CSANT06.HTML
Man; that is some good info. I have nothing but respect for Kent, wa5vjb.
Would someone please clarify some things for me?
1. Arrow Antenna w/8-32 nuts on elements ~7.3
2. Arrow Antenna w/plastic inserts on elements ~7.3
3. Arrow Antenna w/star washers on elements ~7.1
4. Arrow Antenna w/o Diplexer ~7.0
5. Arrow Antenna w/"torqued" elements ~7.0
6. Arrow Antenna w/Diplexer ~4.6
I assume number 6 is the dual band Arrow "out of the box", and that number
4
is the dual band Arrow "out of the box" bypassing the diplexer. Is this
correct?
Does everyone else read this as insulating the elements, and/or
lengthening
the elements only buys you at most .3 dB, or were those tests run with the
diplexer in line?
It seems improving the 2.4 dB of insertion loss of the diplexer would be a
better strategy (although not necessarily easy in the space available)
than
attempting to modify what is very mechanically sound antenna.
73,
Joe kk0sd
-----Original Message-----
From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
Behalf Of Jim Leder
Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2008 8:06 AM
To: Amsat
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Fw: ELK or ARROW
Is it really worth it for .3 DB gain? Seems you would be better served by
not using the diplexer.
Reference http://www.csvhfs.org/ant/CSANT06.HTML
I continue to be amazed how people can judge by just looking at imagined
numbers. Seems that practical hands on experience has no bearing on how
good
or bad the Arrow or the Elk antenna is, but just conjecture over assumed
specifications makes them less than a 'Ford or Chevy'?
If you need a handheld satellite antenna, you have pretty much 3 choices:
-The 'bad' Arrow
-The equally 'bad' Elk
-make your own Arrow clone, which according to the numbers is far superior
(what's that they say about imitation?)
I have an Arrow and have 'field tested' the Elk. I stuck with the Arrow.
My
OPINION, it's better. Others disagree. I contemplated building an Arrow
clone, as there are several websites that tell you how. Are they better?
Perhaps, but I got to think that a DB or 2 won't make that much
difference.
Believe what you want, but I believe the Arrow works just fine the way it
it is.
Jim Bob Buckeye
AKA
**** Jim Leder****
K8CXM since 1961
IBM retiree since 1999
There are 10 types of people in this world -- those who understand binary
and those who don't.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Jerzycke" <kq6ea@xxxxxxx.xxx>
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>; "Gary Joe Mayfield" <gary_mayfield@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2008 11:42 PM
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Fw: ELK or ARROW
> Or you can just lengthen them 1/4" on a side with a threaded spacer....
> Jim KQ6EA
>
>
> --- On Sat, 12/27/08, Gary "Joe" Mayfield <gary_mayfield@xxxxxxx.xxx>
> wrote:
>
>> From: Gary "Joe" Mayfield <gary_mayfield@xxxxxxx.xxx>
>> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Fw: ELK or ARROW
>> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
>> Date: Saturday, December 27, 2008, 8:17 PM
>> Has anyone played with insulating the Arrow elements from
>> the boom? It
>> shouldn't be too hard to do.
>>
>> 73,
>> Joe kk0sd
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx
>> [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
>> Behalf Of Jim Danehy
>> Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2008 8:33 PM
>> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
>> Subject: [amsat-bb] Fw: ELK or ARROW
>>
>>
>> there is the old adage that you get what you pay for . .
>> . why buy a
>> poorly designed antenna that does not work very well
>> > ?
>> >
>> > If you have a 5 element yagi that only produces 4 dbi
>> you are not getting
>>
>> > what you paid for . . . most 2 element yagis would out
>> perform that
>> > statistic . . . a 5 element yagi should be at least 9
>> db + or 10 db dbd
>> > (dipole ) not isotropic . . . . there is something
>> that is called
>> > MERCHANTABILITY . . .i.e., an IMPLIED WARRANTY that
>> you are getting at
>> > least the minimum for your money . . .
>> > 4 dbi for an Arrow is way off base . . . so it is not
>> just ; you can not
>> > afford a Cadillac but you are not even getting a Ford
>> or Chevy . . i.e.,
>>
>> > the gain of a 5 element yagi on 435 mhz . . . that is
>> the issue, not cost
>>
>> > alone . . . . . . same comments apply to the ELK but I
>> have attempted to
>> > make the point that there is a minimum performance for
>> a certain number of
>>
>> > elements that is pretty OBJECTIVE and when it is not
>> met . . . . well
>> > that is my point . . . these two antennas have shown
>> to some testers that
>> > they do not measure up to the minimum EXPECTATIONS . .
>> .unfortunately that
>>
>> > is acceptable to some . . . . then it becomes
>> acceptable to many . . .
>> > and objectivity is abandoned . . .
>> >
>> > Jim W9VNE
>> >
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "Trey Brown"
>> <palintheus@xxxxx.xxx>
>> > To: "Jim Danehy"
>> <jdanehy@xxxxx.xx.xxx>
>> > Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2008 6:39 PM
>> > Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] ELK or ARROW
>> >
>> >
>> >> Thanks for the comments. Realize, though, that not
>> everyone wants or
>> >> can afford to have the Cadillac.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 4:06 PM, Jim Danehy
>> <jdanehy@xxxxx.xx.xxx> wrote:
>> >>> the Arrow antenna has been critiqued by Kent
>> Britain, WA5VJB
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> http://wa5vjb.com/references/Cheap%20Antennas-LEOs.pdf
>> >>>
>> >>> he says that some have measured the Arrow for
>> gain on 435 mhz @ 4 dbi
>> >>> (isotropic) . . . . and that further analysis
>> showed that for the
>> >>> element lengths used on 435 mhz that it peaks
>> at 457 mhz and not 435 mhz
>>
>> >>> . . . Kent is a well respected VHF/UHF antenna
>> person who has plenty of
>> >>> credibility . . .
>> >>>
>> >>> Kent opines that the Arrow, as built does not
>> have its elements
>> >>> insulated from the boom. It uses dimensions
>> for insulated elements . . .
>>
>> >>> so much for the Arrow . . . .
>> >>>
>> >>> Now for the ELK : a local friend of mine owns
>> an Arrow and he uses it
>> >>> successfully. He bought an ELK and attempted
>> to compare the Arrow and
>> >>> the ELK . . . . he could not make an across
>> town QSO on 435 mhz from his
>>
>> >>> second story window with the ELK , so he sent
>> the ELK back for a refund
>> >>> .
>> >>>
>> >>> I have worked and exchanged QSLs with several
>> hundred satellite users .
>> >>> . .the majority of the folks that have worked
>> and QSLed me (close to 250
>>
>> >>> + ) have been using either the Arrow or ELK
>> based upon the information
>> >>> on their cards. So they are popular. Are they
>> optimum ? A lot of
>> >>> anecdotal information would seem to say NO . .
>> .
>> >>>
>> >>> Thirty-five years ago I worked Oscar 6 with a
>> homebrew 2 mtr yagi that
>> >>> probably was worse than either the Arrow or
>> Elk but I worked YV and KL7
>> >>> from Indiana on CW with about 15 watts to the
>> 3 elements which my XYL
>> >>> waved around at my directions . . . not any
>> more . . .what do I use
>> >>> these days : a pair of circular polarity yagis
>> on 10 foot booms
>> >>> manufactured by M Square . . . .
>> >>>
>> >>> Folks ask what should they buy ? Maybe a Ford
>> or maybe a Chevy . . .
>> >>> neither is a Cadillac . . . .
>> >>>
>> >>> Jim W9VNE
>> >>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions
>> expressed are those of the author.
>> >>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support
>> the amateur satellite
>> >>> program!
>> >>> Subscription settings:
>> http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Trey -- N5THX
>> >>
>> >> They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a
>> little temporary
>> >> safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
>> >> - Benjamin Franklin
>> >>
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those
>> of the author.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur
>> satellite program!
>> Subscription settings:
>> http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those
>> of the author.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur
>> satellite program!
>> Subscription settings:
>> http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
_______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 11:48:07 -0500
From: "Jim Danehy" <jdanehy@xxxxx.xx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] give the newbie the full story on ELK and ARROW
please
To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <BC5A24DD017142DD9D20DB5C4050A6FA@xxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Yes folks can make contacts with Arrow and Elk antennas because it is done
every day of the week . . . . that is not the argument here . . . my
comments
have been made to give full disclosure of the several issues which seemed
to
be ignored by advocats of one over the other . . .
Arrow and Elk are LINEARLY polarized antennas . . . . the 17,000 mph
moving
satellite is throwing off CIRCULAR polarized RF energy . . . please
SUBTRACT
3 db or more of gain from your Elk or Arrow when receiving the satellite's
signal . . . some still do not understand this concept and never will . .
.
ignorance is bliss . . . .
For years I grinned ; like I am doing now whenever I saw an 18 wheel
trucker
with a pair of 3 foot high verticals and a big coil of aluminum tubing at
the
bottom . . . . probably a good analogy . . . . yes they can make
contacts
for a little distance just like users of the Arrow and Elk can make
contacts .
. . .
yes "field tests" ( anecdotal evidence ) give you some sense of
satisfaction
. . . . some CB ers enjoy CB operating too . . . ignorance is bliss . . .
.
.working a buddy across town from his house to yours on 2 mtrs or 435 mhz
is
one thing because your antennas are not moving . . . . once one of them
starts
moving quickly ( 17,000 mph ) it all changes . . . I realize that this
requires some further reading, studying and understanding . . . .you need
to
understand the entire story . . . . ignorance is still bliss for far too
many
. . .
up until about 1952 folks used monoband beams . . . . then the triband
beams
with traps appeared . . . degradation occurs one small step at a time . .
.
it is progressive too . . . now we have folks doing CW with their
computers
during contests and they think that they are CW ops . . . . . . note I
did
not say sending . . .
a couple of locals were all in a lather a few years ago when the local DX
packet cluster went down . . . what are we going to do . . . I told them
it
really made no difference to me as I will continue to TUNE the bands for
the
DX . . . because that is what a DXer does . . .
the DUMMYING DOWN of hams is sad . . . of course it depends upon your
base
of experience . . . . if you do not know any better . . . well ignorance
is
bliss . . . we do need fuller disclosure to the newbie who asks a
question .
. . .
If somebody says : yes I know all of that but this is my compromise; that
is
fine . . . but folks are preaching to folks who ask questions : what
should I
buy ? . . . . there is another option which is being ignored . . . thus
my
questioning to let the newbie know that these antennas work but there
should
be a caveat of the compromise . . . without that caveat or understanding
they
think they are on the Gold Standard . . . ignorance is still bliss . . .
in
other areas we call it :
1) doing due diligence or 2) informed consent . . . . some folks hand
over
all their money to somebody else to manage . . .oh yes . .. ignorance
turns
from being bliss . . .to catastrophic . . . but it goes on and will
continue
. . .
Some folks are selling these antennas like some sell religion . . . with
certainty that theirs is the one true one . . .give the newbie the FULL
STORY
please. . . that has been my goal for several weeks now . . . I have
received many nice personal emails thanking me for my comments . . . I am
not
bashing ARROW or ELK just trying to give a FULL DISCLOSURE which is
what
should be going on not just blind advocacy for one of these over the other
. .
. . which is mostly what I have seen with anecdotal comments . . .
Jim W9VNE
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 12:15:48 -0500
From: "Andrew Glasbrenner" <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: give the newbie the full story on ELK and
ARROW please
To: "Jim Danehy" <jdanehy@xxxxx.xx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <E6A1C71A72BD4FD7A3A8FFF522CF060E@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
>
> Arrow and Elk are LINEARLY polarized antennas . . . . the 17,000 mph
> moving satellite is throwing off CIRCULAR polarized RF energy . . .
> please SUBTRACT 3 db or more of gain from your Elk or Arrow when
> receiving the satellite's signal . . . some still do not understand this
> concept and never will . . . ignorance is bliss . . . .
>
This is not always correct. AO-27 and SO-50 both use linear antennas for
their downlink transmitters. Even with AO-51, the downlink signal is
likely
to be elliptical most of the time depending on squint angles. The point to
take away from this is when using a handheld yagi, always try to peak the
signals on both uplink and downlink by rotating the antenna. The up to
~20db
of potential mismatch is more important than the gain of the antenna. All
the current FM satellites use linear whips for the uplink receivers;
peaking
the polarity from worst case to best case is like adding a 500 watt
amplifier to your 5 watt HT. To do this on transmit requires full duplex.
Here's another way to look at it. After the launch of AO-51, we heard
several people say AO-27 seemed to have a stronger signal. AO-27 typically
ran a 500mw downlink, and AO-51 ran similar power. Users with handheld
yagis
or whips who matched polarity gained 3 db on AO-27 reception as compared
with AO-51 (assuming a close to circular signal from AO-51). That's the
same
as effectively doubling the downlink power on AO-27.
Sorry to impede anyone's bliss.
73, Drew KO4MA
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 12:36:13 -0500
From: "Jim Leder" <k8cxm@xxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Elk or Arrow
To: "Amsat" <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <8B9FFB3991E3475494751F5EEB5E45F2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Wow, did this topic ever take a weird turn!
Jim Bob Buckeye
AKA
**** Jim Leder****
K8CXM since 1961
IBM retiree since 1999
There are 10 types of people in this world -- those who understand binary
and those who don't.
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 17:40:32 +0000
From: n3tl@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: give the newbie the full story on ELK and
ARROW please
To: "Jim Danehy" <jdanehy@xxxxx.xx.xxx>, <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID:
<122820081740.21721.4957BA0F00092CC7000054D922243429029B0A02D2089B9A019C
04040A0DBF049BCC02@xxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain
All,
I apologize for the ignorant, dumbed-down, misguided and non-fully
disclosing
information I have provided - on this board and off of it - regarding what
I
have done working the satellites over the past 6 months given the choices
I've
made about assembling a station.
Jim - Did I miss your response to the direct question I asked last night
about
what the gain figures for the Elk ought to be - or is that question too
ignorant to be worthy of an answer?
Tim - N3TL
------------- Original message from "Jim Danehy" <jdanehy@xxxxx.xx.xxx>:
-----
---------
Yes folks can make contacts with Arrow and Elk antennas because it is done
every day of the week . . . . that is not the argument here . . . my
comments
have been made to give full disclosure of the several issues which seemed
to
be
> ignored by advocats of one over the other . . .
> Arrow and Elk are LINEARLY polarized antennas . . . . the 17,000 mph moving
satellite is throwing off CIRCULAR polarized RF energy . . . please
SUBTRACT 3
db or more of gain from your Elk or Arrow when receiving the satellite's
signal . . . some still do not understand this concept and never will . .
.
> ignorance is bliss . . . .
> For years I grinned ; like I am doing now whenever I saw an 18 wheel trucker
with a pair of 3 foot high verticals and a big coil of aluminum tubing at
the
bottom . . . . probably a good analogy . . . . yes they can make contacts
for
> a little distance just like users of the Arrow and Elk can make contacts . .
. .
>
> yes "field tests" ( anecdotal evidence ) give you some sense of satisfaction
.
> . . . some CB ers enjoy CB operating too . . . ignorance is bliss . . . .
> .working a buddy across town from his house to yours on 2 mtrs or 435 mhz is
one
> thing because your antennas are not moving . . . . once one of them starts
> moving quickly ( 17,000 mph ) it all changes . . . I realize that this
requires
> some further reading, studying and understanding . . . .you need to
understand
> the entire story . . . . ignorance is still bliss for far too many . . .
>
> up until about 1952 folks used monoband beams . . . . then the triband beams
> with traps appeared . . . degradation occurs one small step at a time . . .
it
> is progressive too . . . now we have folks doing CW with their computers
during
> contests and they think that they are CW ops . . . . . . note I did not say
> sending . . .
>
> a couple of locals were all in a lather a few years ago when the local DX
packet
> cluster went down . . . what are we going to do . . . I told them it really
> made no difference to me as I will continue to TUNE the bands for the DX . .
.
> because that is what a DXer does . . .
>
> the DUMMYING DOWN of hams is sad . . . of course it depends upon your base
of
> experience . . . . if you do not know any better . . . well ignorance is
bliss
> . . . we do need fuller disclosure to the newbie who asks a question . . . .
>
> If somebody says : yes I know all of that but this is my compromise; that is
> fine . . . but folks are preaching to folks who ask questions : what should
I
> buy ? . . . . there is another option which is being ignored . . . thus my
> questioning to let the newbie know that these antennas work but there should
be
> a caveat of the compromise . . . without that caveat or understanding they
think
> they are on the Gold Standard . . . ignorance is still bliss . . . in other
> areas we call it :
>
> 1) doing due diligence or 2) informed consent . . . . some folks hand over
all
> their money to somebody else to manage . . .oh yes . .. ignorance turns from
> being bliss . . .to catastrophic . . . but it goes on and will continue . .
.
>
> Some folks are selling these antennas like some sell religion . . . with
> certainty that theirs is the one true one . . .give the newbie the FULL
STORY
> please. . . that has been my goal for several weeks now . . . I have
received
> many nice personal emails thanking me for my comments . . . I am not bashing
> ARROW or ELK just trying to give a FULL DISCLOSURE which is what should be
> going on not just blind advocacy for one of these over the other . . . .
which
> is mostly what I have seen with anecdotal comments . . .
>
>
> Jim W9VNE
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 07:42:49 HST
From: dukenuke@xxxx.xxx
Subject: [amsat-bb] Mahalo
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <200812281742.mBSHgm9f027824@xxxx.xxxx.xxx>
Mahalo
to the many ham enthusiasts that I have talked to via satellite
over the holidays. What a treat this has been for me!
I've noticed some "Arrow" discussion on the BBS. I am not a real
technical ham but I do know that I can routinely hit the mainland
from Hawaii at 1 degree elevation with the Arrow (ask K7WIN).
So hopefully, when I am back in Honolulu next month I will be
able to continue some of my new friendships via satellite. Always
willing to travel, perhaps I can also provide some additional grids
other than BL11.
Mahalo and Happy New Year to all
Respectfully,
robert smith NH7WN
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 11:45:41 -0600 (CST)
From: "Alan Sieg WB5RMG" <wb5rmg@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Building an EggBeater
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID: <4171.192.168.121.31.1230486341.squirrel@xxx.xxx.xxx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
PE0SAT said :
> Does anybody have a good article from building an Eggbeater
> for 144 and 435 MHz?
I have built several of these in the past (Eggbeater II by K5OE),
and currently have two in the attic - one each for 145 and 435.
They serve me well, both for satellites and horizontal-omni for VHF
contest.
I have no outside antennae currently, but the 144 version I built for my
Dad
6 years ago is still intact atop his 50 ft tower. I will probably paint
the PVC on the next ones I build for outdoor service.
The original website is gone, but I recently found a mirror site :
http://www.observations.biz/K5OE/ look for Eggbeater link.
Construction is simple, the given dimensions worked well for me.
Hopefully you have or can locate some RG-62 (93 Ohm) for phasing loops.
Build the 70cm version first, as the smaller elements are easier to
handle.
The experience will help in construction of the 2m version.
I currently have no other antennae for comparison, but these are an
improvement over simple verticals. I appreciate the fact that they provide
horizontal polarization at the horizon - as I also enjoy the VHF contests.
Receive preamps are nice if you have them. (no need for a rotator either)
On satellite, I use a Yaesu FT-736R (25~30 watts), about 60 feet of good
air-dialectric coax for each, and these two Eggbeaters.
I typically only operate on VO-52 as I prefer linear modes...
I have been away from the birds for several years,
but I am now returning - thanks to these antennae...
Good luck, enjoy - and let us know how you progress.
Thanks /;^)
--
<- Licensed in 1976, WB5RMG = Alan Sieg * AMSAT#20554 ->
<- http://www.somenet.net * http://wb5rmg.somenet.net ->
<- http://www.linkedin.com/in/alansieg * My 'Day Job' ->
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 19:30:39 +0100 (CET)
From: "PE0SAT" <pe0sat@xxxxx.xx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Building an EggBeater
To: "Alan Sieg WB5RMG" <wb5rmg@xxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Message-ID:
<bbf763cc2f302e7fc5876b01851bc26b.squirrel@xxxxxxx.xxxxx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
On Sun, December 28, 2008 18:45, Alan Sieg WB5RMG wrote:
Hi Alan,
> The original website is gone, but I recently found a mirror site :
> http://www.observations.biz/K5OE/ look for Eggbeater link.
Thanks for the link, the image for the phasing harness is not working.
Do you have the orginal image?
PE0SAT
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 13:46:52 -0500
From: "Jim Danehy" <jdanehy@xxxxx.xx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: give the newbie the full story on ELK and
ARROW please
To: "Andrew Glasbrenner" <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>,
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <1131A926B25340819B71F8415880A9BC@xxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=response
We probably disagree . . . . years ago we would hear "picket fence" as the
guys would call it from an FM mobile stations on two meters into the
repeater . . . or simplex . . . . the point I have been attempting to
make
: I had not seen any comment until Andy responded to my attempt to make
folks aware of CP or elliptical ( I will not split hairs ) and despite
using a vertical they still generate deep fades by being linear polarized
.
. . that is my point give the newbie the full story . . . which has been
sadly missing from the advocacy of Arrow vs. Elk . . . .
Jim W9VNE
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Glasbrenner" <glasbrenner@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: "Jim Danehy" <jdanehy@xxxxx.xx.xxx>; <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2008 12:15 PM
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] give the newbie the full story on ELK and ARROW
please
>
>>
>> Arrow and Elk are LINEARLY polarized antennas . . . . the 17,000 mph
>> moving satellite is throwing off CIRCULAR polarized RF energy . . .
>> please SUBTRACT 3 db or more of gain from your Elk or Arrow when
>> receiving the satellite's signal . . . some still do not understand this
>> concept and never will . . . ignorance is bliss . . . .
>>
>
> This is not always correct. AO-27 and SO-50 both use linear antennas for
> their downlink transmitters. Even with AO-51, the downlink signal is
> likely to be elliptical most of the time depending on squint angles. The
> point to take away from this is when using a handheld yagi, always try to
> peak the signals on both uplink and downlink by rotating the antenna. The
> up to ~20db of potential mismatch is more important than the gain of the
> antenna. All the current FM satellites use linear whips for the uplink
> receivers; peaking the polarity from worst case to best case is like
> adding a 500 watt amplifier to your 5 watt HT. To do this on transmit
> requires full duplex.
>
> Here's another way to look at it. After the launch of AO-51, we heard
> several people say AO-27 seemed to have a stronger signal. AO-27 typically
> ran a 500mw downlink, and AO-51 ran similar power. Users with handheld
> yagis or whips who matched polarity gained 3 db on AO-27 reception as
> compared with AO-51 (assuming a close to circular signal from AO-51).
> That's the same as effectively doubling the downlink power on AO-27.
>
> Sorry to impede anyone's bliss.
>
> 73, Drew KO4MA
>
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 09:47:43 -0900
From: Edward Cole <kl7uw@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Fw: ELK or ARROW
To: "Amsat" <AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx>
Message-ID: <200812281847.mBSIliim039467@xxxxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
I have had an Arrow for 8 years or so, and used in several years ago
on UO-14 and AO-27 with my FT-817 with good contacts being made. I
have also mounted the Arrow on my B5400 az-el rotator for use with
these satellites and others briefly (only with 2m elements
installed). I have taken the antenna to mountain-top locations to
work 2m-SSB over 200-miles running with a 50w amp on 2m. I have used
only the UHF elements for roving over 150-mile paths on 432. When
using on only one band I didnot use the diplexer.
It seems to work quite well for its size. The antennas match well
for SWR (but that does not say they are properly designed for optimum
gain or pattern).
I might take the dimensions and model them on my antenna sw to see
what it says, but I am satisfied that the Arrow functions fine for
its application.
How it measures up against other antennas of similar style/size I
would not know. The best comparison would be to take all competitor
antennas to the next CSVHF Conference and enter them into the antenna
measurement program. The hams running them are quite experienced in
making good field measurements of gain and pattern and the antennas
would be fairly compared under exactly the same test conditions. In
my mind that should settle all claims.
My current situation does not have my satellite antennas installed:
M2-436CP42, LY2345, KLM-22C, 33-inch dish with helix feed (were used
for AO-10/40). I have used a 19-inch mag-mount mobile antenna stuck
to square of sheet metal to capture AO-51 telemetry using a 432
preamp, and am thinking about building up 2m&70cm Lindeblad's
(sp?). I also have 2m halo that has only been used while mobile in
the lower-48. I suspect that they might function OK on some Leos. I
have a 7-element M2 2m yagi that might be used though it was bought
for roving. It is probably a little high in gain for this (a 3-4
element yagi seems more appropriate for Leo work).
73 & HNY from Alaska!
Ed - KL7UW
At 05:06 AM 12/28/2008, Jim Leder wrote:
>Is it really worth it for .3 DB gain? Seems you would be better served by
>not using the diplexer.
>
>Reference http://www.csvhfs.org/ant/CSANT06.HTML
>
>I continue to be amazed how people can judge by just looking at imagined
>numbers. Seems that practical hands on experience has no bearing on how good
>or bad the Arrow or the Elk antenna is, but just conjecture over assumed
>specifications makes them less than a 'Ford or Chevy'?
>
> If you need a handheld satellite antenna, you have pretty much 3 choices:
>-The 'bad' Arrow
>-The equally 'bad' Elk
>-make your own Arrow clone, which according to the numbers is far superior
>(what's that they say about imitation?)
>
>I have an Arrow and have 'field tested' the Elk. I stuck with the Arrow. My
>OPINION, it's better. Others disagree. I contemplated building an Arrow
>clone, as there are several websites that tell you how. Are they better?
>Perhaps, but I got to think that a DB or 2 won't make that much difference.
>
> Believe what you want, but I believe the Arrow works just fine the way it
>it is.
>
> Jim Bob Buckeye
> AKA
> **** Jim Leder****
> K8CXM since 1961
> IBM retiree since 1999
>
>There are 10 types of people in this world -- those who understand binary
>and those who don't.
>
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Jim Jerzycke" <kq6ea@xxxxxxx.xxx>
>To: <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>; "Gary Joe Mayfield" <gary_mayfield@xxxxxxx.xxx>
>Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2008 11:42 PM
>Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Fw: ELK or ARROW
>
>
> > Or you can just lengthen them 1/4" on a side with a threaded spacer....
> > Jim KQ6EA
> >
> >
> > --- On Sat, 12/27/08, Gary "Joe" Mayfield <gary_mayfield@xxxxxxx.xxx>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> From: Gary "Joe" Mayfield <gary_mayfield@xxxxxxx.xxx>
> >> Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Fw: ELK or ARROW
> >> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> >> Date: Saturday, December 27, 2008, 8:17 PM
> >> Has anyone played with insulating the Arrow elements from
> >> the boom? It
> >> shouldn't be too hard to do.
> >>
> >> 73,
> >> Joe kk0sd
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxx
> >> [mailto:amsat-bb-bounces@xxxxx.xxxx On
> >> Behalf Of Jim Danehy
> >> Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2008 8:33 PM
> >> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> >> Subject: [amsat-bb] Fw: ELK or ARROW
> >>
> >>
> >> there is the old adage that you get what you pay for . .
> >> . why buy a
> >> poorly designed antenna that does not work very well
> >> > ?
> >> >
> >> > If you have a 5 element yagi that only produces 4 dbi
> >> you are not getting
> >>
> >> > what you paid for . . . most 2 element yagis would out
> >> perform that
> >> > statistic . . . a 5 element yagi should be at least 9
> >> db + or 10 db dbd
> >> > (dipole ) not isotropic . . . . there is something
> >> that is called
> >> > MERCHANTABILITY . . .i.e., an IMPLIED WARRANTY that
> >> you are getting at
> >> > least the minimum for your money . . .
> >> > 4 dbi for an Arrow is way off base . . . so it is not
> >> just ; you can not
> >> > afford a Cadillac but you are not even getting a Ford
> >> or Chevy . . i.e.,
> >>
> >> > the gain of a 5 element yagi on 435 mhz . . . that is
> >> the issue, not cost
> >>
> >> > alone . . . . . . same comments apply to the ELK but I
> >> have attempted to
> >> > make the point that there is a minimum performance for
> >> a certain number of
> >>
> >> > elements that is pretty OBJECTIVE and when it is not
> >> met . . . . well
> >> > that is my point . . . these two antennas have shown
> >> to some testers that
> >> > they do not measure up to the minimum EXPECTATIONS . .
> >> .unfortunately that
> >>
> >> > is acceptable to some . . . . then it becomes
> >> acceptable to many . . .
> >> > and objectivity is abandoned . . .
> >> >
> >> > Jim W9VNE
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> > From: "Trey Brown"
> >> <palintheus@xxxxx.xxx>
> >> > To: "Jim Danehy"
> >> <jdanehy@xxxxx.xx.xxx>
> >> > Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2008 6:39 PM
> >> > Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] ELK or ARROW
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> Thanks for the comments. Realize, though, that not
> >> everyone wants or
> >> >> can afford to have the Cadillac.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 4:06 PM, Jim Danehy
> >> <jdanehy@xxxxx.xx.xxx> wrote:
> >> >>> the Arrow antenna has been critiqued by Kent
> >> Britain, WA5VJB
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> http://wa5vjb.com/references/Cheap%20Antennas-LEOs.pdf
> >> >>>
> >> >>> he says that some have measured the Arrow for
> >> gain on 435 mhz @ 4 dbi
> >> >>> (isotropic) . . . . and that further analysis
> >> showed that for the
> >> >>> element lengths used on 435 mhz that it peaks
> >> at 457 mhz and not 435 mhz
> >>
> >> >>> . . . Kent is a well respected VHF/UHF antenna
> >> person who has plenty of
> >> >>> credibility . . .
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Kent opines that the Arrow, as built does not
> >> have its elements
> >> >>> insulated from the boom. It uses dimensions
> >> for insulated elements . . .
> >>
> >> >>> so much for the Arrow . . . .
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Now for the ELK : a local friend of mine owns
> >> an Arrow and he uses it
> >> >>> successfully. He bought an ELK and attempted
> >> to compare the Arrow and
> >> >>> the ELK . . . . he could not make an across
> >> town QSO on 435 mhz from his
> >>
> >> >>> second story window with the ELK , so he sent
> >> the ELK back for a refund
> >> >>> .
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I have worked and exchanged QSLs with several
> >> hundred satellite users .
> >> >>> . .the majority of the folks that have worked
> >> and QSLed me (close to 250
> >>
> >> >>> + ) have been using either the Arrow or ELK
> >> based upon the information
> >> >>> on their cards. So they are popular. Are they
> >> optimum ? A lot of
> >> >>> anecdotal information would seem to say NO . .
> >> .
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Thirty-five years ago I worked Oscar 6 with a
> >> homebrew 2 mtr yagi that
> >> >>> probably was worse than either the Arrow or
> >> Elk but I worked YV and KL7
> >> >>> from Indiana on CW with about 15 watts to the
> >> 3 elements which my XYL
> >> >>> waved around at my directions . . . not any
> >> more . . .what do I use
> >> >>> these days : a pair of circular polarity yagis
> >> on 10 foot booms
> >> >>> manufactured by M Square . . . .
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Folks ask what should they buy ? Maybe a Ford
> >> or maybe a Chevy . . .
> >> >>> neither is a Cadillac . . . .
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Jim W9VNE
> >> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions
> >> expressed are those of the author.
> >> >>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support
> >> the amateur satellite
> >> >>> program!
> >> >>> Subscription settings:
> >> http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Trey -- N5THX
> >> >>
> >> >> They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a
> >> little temporary
> >> >> safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
> >> >> - Benjamin Franklin
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those
> >> of the author.
> >> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur
> >> satellite program!
> >> Subscription settings:
> >> http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those
> >> of the author.
> >> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur
> >> satellite program!
> >> Subscription settings:
> >> http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> > Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
>_______________________________________________
>Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
>Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
>Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Sent via amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
End of AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 3, Issue 676
****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
