Has anyone of you experienced performance equal to or exceeding 9 foot whip on 11m using the same mounting vehicle setup but with a vertically challenged antenna? Wouldn't it be nice to somehow exceed the range of the 9 foot whip in less vertical footprint? It may sound like a pipe dream but how many times have we been told something cannot be done and then it happens anyway?
While many compare one antenna type to another, be it bottom loaded vs. bottom loaded or helical vs helical, we tend to lose sight of the standard full length 1/4 wave. As a result we slowly drift away from what is the best omni mobile in terms of efficiency and performance (range). I am seeking max performance in a livable package. The yardstick is a full quarterwave whip, which current technical know-how generally believes cannot be beat. I ran a series of tests comparing an high efficiency antenna that was measured/ modified by me and it came out equal to the 9 ft whips (steel and fiberglass) in my tests after normalizing test variability in measurement. Splitting hairs is not what I am after, exceeding 9 foot thin whip performance is, so I am trying to achieve an easily discernable difference (improvement) without having to resort to splitting hairs. So far I beleive that I have practically matched the performance of full length whip, vs. Shakespeare 102, Hustler steel, and Francis Amazer/Wheeler Dealer. The results detail are elsewhere, but here's the antenna. I will model using EZNEC soon and I wish it could be put on CST to determine field effects about the surface of this antenna, but field tests are all I have access to now so I'll have to derive the electromagnetic performance that way. This is what I named 76's BIOHAZARD
While many compare one antenna type to another, be it bottom loaded vs. bottom loaded or helical vs helical, we tend to lose sight of the standard full length 1/4 wave. As a result we slowly drift away from what is the best omni mobile in terms of efficiency and performance (range). I am seeking max performance in a livable package. The yardstick is a full quarterwave whip, which current technical know-how generally believes cannot be beat. I ran a series of tests comparing an high efficiency antenna that was measured/ modified by me and it came out equal to the 9 ft whips (steel and fiberglass) in my tests after normalizing test variability in measurement. Splitting hairs is not what I am after, exceeding 9 foot thin whip performance is, so I am trying to achieve an easily discernable difference (improvement) without having to resort to splitting hairs. So far I beleive that I have practically matched the performance of full length whip, vs. Shakespeare 102, Hustler steel, and Francis Amazer/Wheeler Dealer. The results detail are elsewhere, but here's the antenna. I will model using EZNEC soon and I wish it could be put on CST to determine field effects about the surface of this antenna, but field tests are all I have access to now so I'll have to derive the electromagnetic performance that way. This is what I named 76's BIOHAZARD
