• You can now help support WorldwideDX when you shop on Amazon at no additional cost to you! Simply follow this Shop on Amazon link first and a portion of any purchase is sent to WorldwideDX to help with site costs.
  • Click here to find out how to win free radios from Retevis!

maco m104 flat vs shooting star

radioreddz

W9WDX Amateur Radio Club Member
Nov 20, 2005
367
107
53
so. maryland
want to up grade beam. using maco Y quad now. been intrested in longer range DX. looking at either going to a shooting star with the vertical & horizontal or just going plain maco 104 on the flat side and keeping th Y quad up for vertical talk or upgrading from my antron 99 to a better maco or 10k interceptor ground plain for vertical talk. will the plain flat side beam perform better than a beam that has the vertical and flat side.
 

radioreddz,
Do yourself a favor. INstead of changing antennas raise it 20 or 30 feet. It'll do more in the long run. Nothing wrong with the other antennas you mentioned but the additional height will make a bigger difference.
- 'Doc
 
W5LZ said:
radioreddz,
Do yourself a favor. INstead of changing antennas raise it 20 or 30 feet. It'll do more in the long run. Nothing wrong with the other antennas you mentioned but the additional height will make a bigger difference.
- 'Doc
would that make that much difference with the Y quad its only two element. simular to the PDLII that i miss so much but not close in performance. will that make it close to the perfomance of the 4 element yagi or the shooting star. would be a money saving option would only have to buy a longer couple lengths of coax. thanks also are you the tech DOC where a lot of guys send there 2510's
 
Radioreddz,
Easy part first, No, I'm not that "Doc". And now the 'other' part. Will changing height make an equal amount of difference as doubling the number of elements of an antenna? Sort of depends on where the thing is now, but not really. It will make a suprising amount of difference with what you will hear though If it's already at something like 50 feet or so, swap antennas. If it isn't close to that, and since height helps any antenna, it's still something to think about as an "instead of" thingy.
Quads tend to 'open' and 'close' bands when compared to 'stick' antennas (beams). Loop antennas tend to seem 'quieter' than non-loop antennas, and a two element quad tends to be comparable to a three element beam. (Lots of 'lee-way' in that but it tends to be true in most cases.)
POlarization can make a huge difference at times, but never consistantly, at HF. Having both, and being able to switch between them, is a very nice option. But that 'difference' depends entirely on propagation and changes all the time, mostly. When the band seems to fade out at one polarrization, switching to the other one can make it seem to open bak up, sometimes. And when the band goes 'dead' it won't matter what the polarization is. I tend to like horizontal polarization, not that it's consistantly 'better', but mechanically (and practically) it's an easier thing to contend with. Almost all man-made noise is vertically oriented. Until propagation plays a big part of it (distance), having the same polarization as the one you're listening to always helps.
Beam or single element antennas. Directional antennas will always have beter 'ears' than single element antennas in particular directions. Doesn't really matter what the particular antenna is, it's just the 'nature of the beast'.
Then there's the 'is it worth the trouble' thingy. There's just no absolute answer to that, too many 'depends' in that question. Sort of like sticking your finger in a light socket to see if there's electricity there. Half the time it's the easiest way to find out. The other half of the time you get bit. The absolute most bestest set up in one location can turn out to be an absolute dog in others.
One way of finding out is using one of the antenna modeling programs and plugging in all the 'right' numbers. And if you think that's an easy solution, I happen to have this huge boat for sale, right next to the bridge made from gold bricks that's for sale too! (Hey! Get Marconi to do it for you, I'm too @#$ lazy!)
- 'Doc

PS - Don't you just love answers like that? Can't get a straight answer out of it if you beat it with a hammer - LOL. Good luck.

PPS - The 50 foot thing is just a nice round number, not particularly significant.
 
"will the plain flat side beam perform better than a beam that has the vertical and flat side."

under what conditions? in a situation where local communication (direct wave) with other similarly polarized stations is desired it can be extremely effective in attenuating signals from vertically polarized bases and mobiles, regardless of the direction in which the array is oriented.

f1/f2 supported skywave propagation is another matter. since the polarization of a skywave signal is always in rotation, fading on a horizontally polarized array can be as deep as -20db. or better if the antenna contains no vertically polarized component. this problem is not solved by a dual polarity array unless some arrangement has been made which allows both "antennas" to be active simultaneously. phasing the two antennas can make this happen. (the shooting star can be adapted for this type of operation) alternatively, another option is the v-quad or delta loop in the "delta" configuration which can be used with a single feedline to accomplish the same objective.

"been intrested in longer range DX."

reduced fading of the transmitted and received signals results in extended operating range.
 
I think the quad with both polarizations is better because you can swith back and forth. the flat side only would be all you have if going with flat side beam.

AP
 

dxChat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
  • @ kopcicle:
    If you know you know. Anyone have Sam's current #? He hasn't been on since Oct 1st. Someone let him know I'm looking.
  • dxBot:
    535A has left the room.