-
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.
Marconi working Gain Master vs. Starduster
- Thread starter Marconi
- Start date
love that ole starduster 1/4 wave. nice stealthy anytenna bdeen reading your revews
and curious what 1.4 wave antenna worked close to the same or equal to the GM
was it the sder or NTO.?from your signal reports seems the NTO might have kept up
better.just my opinion .what u think
and curious what 1.4 wave antenna worked close to the same or equal to the GM
was it the sder or NTO.?from your signal reports seems the NTO might have kept up
better.just my opinion .what u think
I'll have to redo my test for my Starduster and my New Top One. Both installs last month were bad, and neither antenna responded right. When I took them down I found some loose parts on both.
I'm still testing as much as I can with the winds we're having. So far my Starduster is producing RX signals right with my Gain Master and a few TX signal reports show first one then the other by a needles width maybe a bit in favor of the Starduster.
intresting results for sure. after you test them against the gainmaster
can you check both the sder an nto against each other?ive always wonder
what one was better.i knew some locals that had them and both swore
by them but neither was ever tested
can you check both the sder an nto against each other?ive always wonder
what one was better.i knew some locals that had them and both swore
by them but neither was ever tested
One rule of thumb for testing antennae: both antenna's MUST be on the same mounting pole with the same coax, same pl plug, mounting pole at the exact same height, the coax running along the ground in the same place and preferably both tests should be done within 10 minutes of each other.
Reasons: if you place two antennae on two different poles with two sets of pl plugs, two sets of coax and in two different locations then you are not testing one antenna against another, you are actually testing your ability to solder, the difference between the pl plugs, the difference in coax loss, the attenuation of each set up against each other and finally if you cannot test within 5 or 10 minutes on the same pole then ultimately you are going to be effected by skip conditions.
I'm sorry to say Marconi that the way you are testing antennae is pointless and futile.
Reasons: if you place two antennae on two different poles with two sets of pl plugs, two sets of coax and in two different locations then you are not testing one antenna against another, you are actually testing your ability to solder, the difference between the pl plugs, the difference in coax loss, the attenuation of each set up against each other and finally if you cannot test within 5 or 10 minutes on the same pole then ultimately you are going to be effected by skip conditions.
I'm sorry to say Marconi that the way you are testing antennae is pointless and futile.
To give you an example Marconi, you are talking about needle widths here in test results so lets further elaborate:- Lets just say you think you've soldered both PL plugs in the exact same way but unbeknowing to you, the soldering on one plug is 20% more efficient than on the other. Where does your needle width stand now?
One antenna is placed nearer to a large tree than the other, we all know the ability of vedgetation to attenuate signals, where does your needle width stand now?
Both sets of coax are running along the ground but what if you have placed one coax over the top of an underground cable or a water source? All coax produce an electromagnetic field around them which is invariably affected by the surroundings which affect that field. Where does your needle width stand now?
You must narrow all variables down by using the same pole, coax, pl plug, radio etc for both antennae otherwise those variables will affect the test and those needle widths you talk about are not worth the paper they are written on.
One antenna is placed nearer to a large tree than the other, we all know the ability of vedgetation to attenuate signals, where does your needle width stand now?
Both sets of coax are running along the ground but what if you have placed one coax over the top of an underground cable or a water source? All coax produce an electromagnetic field around them which is invariably affected by the surroundings which affect that field. Where does your needle width stand now?
You must narrow all variables down by using the same pole, coax, pl plug, radio etc for both antennae otherwise those variables will affect the test and those needle widths you talk about are not worth the paper they are written on.
You would like to do one of these tests you are talking about, nav2010?
I'd like to see your results on these antennas in that way.
I'd like to see your results on these antennas in that way.
I already have done several tests using Sirio 827, half wave gp's 5\8ths wave gp's with and without ground plains, isolated from the mast and choked.
All on the same mast using the same set up and the same radio.
Tried several different methods and have noted the results.
I'm not criticizing Marconi for his enthusiasm and interest, i'm questioning his methodology which have far to many loop holes in them to be valid tests.
It only takes one tiny impedance bump in the coax of marconi's two sets ups to completely null and void the results.
Using the same set up for all antenna's helps to avoid stuff like this.
A aint bitching at all. But if you are going to break it down to solder joints on coax connectors, you need a faster changeover.
You were talking about impedance bumps and bad solder jobs. And I said if you were going to be that absolute, you needed to be able to switch faster than 10 minutes.