-
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.
New antenna from Sirio Gain-Master
- Thread starter dxswe
- Start date
That 'beacon' may have actually been on 27.095 which is 11A and often used for R/C toys, wireless computer mouses, and all sorts of things requiring a frequency to operate.
Another A+ for the video.
That display sure mimics well that of the TS-2000. Is that the 2547?
You may be right 007, after I got thru doing the video I moved around to see how broadbanded the signal was, and it did seem to center below 27.100 a bit. It's a very narrow banded two tone chatter and doesn't splatter at all... considering it shows me an S9 signal. I and some of my buddies farther out, tried to triangulate the approximate source, but to no avail, noise and Caribbean DX started rolling. I'm even getting mobile traffic off Galveston Island, which is due Southeast of me. The center of downtown Houston is right between me and Galveston blocking the way, so I seldom hear any traffic from down there.
This beacon won't eliminate my need for RX signals or even better TX/RX testing, cause you can get a much better feel for other nuance qualities with voice, have an idea of varying distance, and see changes with your buddies as they change their antennas, move their beams, increase their power, and even different radios sometimes.
Oggy is right, doing videos is a lot more convincing, seeing actual results of signal changes. I guess to some degree it's more like Bob and Shockwave have talked about when doing their single source testing.
Thanks for the comments Oggy, I hope to have the chance to get better doing a few videos, and I'm sure it will show me a thing or two, it may already have.
A new tool in the toolbox is always good to have...as they say down here in Texas.
Note to 821, H&Y is the source of the Gain Master, but last I looked they were out of stock at the store. Go on Ebay and search for Gain Master and check H&Y's web page store, they show to have them in stock at the same price.
I like what one guy I saw on youtube does, - makes a partial video of one, then pauses it and returns later to finish the video with the next antenna up on the same mast so the comparison is instant A-B but with 20-30 minutes actually between them, then back to the 1st.
...Marconi, you taking B-12?
...and make sure you get a banana from time to time for the potassium!
...Marconi, you taking B-12?
...and make sure you get a banana from time to time for the potassium!I like what one guy I saw on youtube does, - makes a partial video of one, then pauses it and returns later to finish the video with the next antenna up on the same mast so the comparison is instant A-B but with 20-30 minutes actually between them, then back to the 1st.
...Marconi, you taking B-12?
No B-12, but it's a good idea, only problem with this vit. is it also pumps up my appetite and I sure don't need that.
007, back in the summer of 2009, I tried the one mast idea at the suggestion from Bob, but I didn't have the strength or stamina to stay with trying to do it fast. At 72 then, nothing works fast anymore. I still have some strength, but my hands are affected some by my diabetes, so that even gives me problems trying to lift my big ole' I-10K.
I was disappointed with my I-10K not doing better, because I love to tune on it. For years, Bob and I complained about it not seeming possible to set the resonance and match at or near the resonant frequency, but I think I've solved that problem on my end. It is fun to tune it now and watch the match actually dip dramatically at resonance and see the bandwidth broaden. I got a tune like this back in 2009, and again the other day I tuned it and saw my analyzer showing me 1.75 mhz <2.0:1 bandwidth, SWR=1.04, R=42-51, X=0, from 27.105-27.405. That is the best I've ever seen it. The SWR bandwidth also looked very good on the Antenna Work Sheet as well. I lost the dip on moving higher, but it still showed a very good match. I don't see this sweet spot dip using my SWR meter though.
Even so, I'm still not sure that near perfect tuning on these antennas really makes a difference in performance, even though I would think otherwise. My I-10K did not fair so well vs. the GM and I didn't have it up very long. I tend to agree with some others that some of those big aluminum antennas may need to season a bit, and then they will show some improvement.
Bob talks about tuning with his hybrid Vector, but I've not knowingly ever realized the gain at a distance he did. I have, however, always seem to be able to talk at a distance whether testing or not, and when conditions permit. So maybe I've experienced something similar and didn't realize it.
My GM seems to be getting better and it has been up for almost a month now. My how time flies when you're having fun.
Marconi on his Gain Master doing a watergate with 4040
No 007, but I think I modeled it. If I still have it, I'll see how it compares and send you some output reports. If you have Eznec Demo or better I'll send you the file.
I-10K model simulated with radiator and radials only and not matching:
20.82' radiator 3.80 dbi @ 8* a short .625 at 27.205 mhz which might be close to a Maco V5/8 length.
22.60' radiator 3.67 dbi @ 8* regular length at 27.205 mhz.
23.14' radiator 3.56 dbi @ 8* .64, 6.48" longer than regular at 27.205 mhz .
Here is a 4040 watergate of ole' Grampa working his Gain Master if you want to see it in action.
We did one the other day when I had both the GM and the AstroPlane hooked to my switch box. I don't know how that showed up on Scott's end as I switched, but it got lost in the process somehow.
Today I heard him in there and broke for him again, but I had the GM connected directly into the radio so, no switching. I really wanted to see that one. Maybe the next time if I have my ducks in a row, and can make it across the county line again.
No 007, but I think I modeled it. If I still have it, I'll see how it compares and send you some output reports. If you have Eznec Demo or better I'll send you the file.
I-10K model simulated with radiator and radials only and not matching:
20.82' radiator 3.80 dbi @ 8* a short .625 at 27.205 mhz which might be close to a Maco V5/8 length.
22.60' radiator 3.67 dbi @ 8* regular length at 27.205 mhz.
23.14' radiator 3.56 dbi @ 8* .64, 6.48" longer than regular at 27.205 mhz .
Here is a 4040 watergate of ole' Grampa working his Gain Master if you want to see it in action.
We did one the other day when I had both the GM and the AstroPlane hooked to my switch box. I don't know how that showed up on Scott's end as I switched, but it got lost in the process somehow.
Today I heard him in there and broke for him again, but I had the GM connected directly into the radio so, no switching. I really wanted to see that one. Maybe the next time if I have my ducks in a row, and can make it across the county line again.
Last edited:
Nice little Radiogate! I noticed toward the end, just before he moved frequency, that you were rockin' & rollin' over the hornets nest by a good amount.
Maybe when you switched to the AP was when you faded out...?
You could use a little more audio 'kick' but gees, what a signal you hammer out there! You sounded about 30-50Hz lower in frequency than his receiver was set.
That's how you sounded, (if not even a little louder!) when we talked.
I've got to get mine on-line so I can show off MY meter movement!
...for a .64 I-10K you should have right about 22' 9.5", no top hat. See if that doesn't offer decent performance to those 40-70 mile stations.
Maybe when you switched to the AP was when you faded out...?
You could use a little more audio 'kick' but gees, what a signal you hammer out there! You sounded about 30-50Hz lower in frequency than his receiver was set.
That's how you sounded, (if not even a little louder!) when we talked.
I've got to get mine on-line so I can show off MY meter movement!
...for a .64 I-10K you should have right about 22' 9.5", no top hat. See if that doesn't offer decent performance to those 40-70 mile stations.
Eddie, tuning for lowest swr has no bearing on antenna gain, with any antenna moving the main radiator in and out and finding where the antenna will be resonant at a given frequency and you will have max tx/rx. at that point you can then match it to your transmitter or just build a transmitter that has the same output impedance as the antennas impedance. No matching network at the antenna needed, now hows that for matching network loss NONE!!!.
007, I've asked you before if you have any valid evidence there is a shred of truth to your understanding about the .64 wavelength story and more importantly how does it apply to armature or CB radio. Do you even have a tid bit of history to try and follow up on. The ideas of the 5/8 wave are reported to have been studied in the 1920's and a report was published for the US Broadcast Engineers in 1924. See attached. This is just the 1 page of a 6 page article. I don't make any claims about the attached document, it is available in volume 1 of ARRL Antenna Compendium 1985, by Donald K. Reynolds, K7DBA. It was his recapping of the original study, idea, and possibly some of the results of the original study and was strictly for Broadcast radio.
The science at the time and the study had nothing at all to do with armature radio, in fact the study was regarding ground wave technology which does not even apply above the range of 1-2 megahertz much less 3 megs where armature radio begins and higher.
You might be able to find the article on the Internet, but you need to understand some of history regarding this period in order to be able to separate out the wheat from the chaff. I have no proof, but there are foot notes in Reynolds article that may provide more to the story. You will note right off that he does not even mention .64 wavelength and neither did the study.
I have read another article years ago that I've looked for repeatedly and am unable to find. The article is about the Japanese doing a study to discount what the Americans had done in the 1920's concerning Broadcast Radio Antenna development, and thus the account of their ignored and overlooked advantages of the .64 wavelength as being superior to the 5/8 wave.
During this time in history the Japanese were Imperialistic and wanted to rule the world and they started crap with every one that showed to be getting ahead in this world on any score.
If you read Reynold's report and Cebik's recap report on Reynolds report, you will start to get a new view that discounts much of the advantages that have been attributed to the ideas for the 5/8 wave...say nothing about the .64 wave which only existed in the minds of the Japs.
IMO, all of the CBBS on this subject comes from the misunderstandings that are pervasively based on actual facts noted in the original report, but with a slant to the positive that is in error and totally misconstrued. The most glaring thing I find is the iconic charts for gain and height noted below. These two charts are noted on Fig. 3, page 102, of ARRL's Antenna Compendium and they may be right on the money accurate, but the implications in the CB world of what they represent are totally false, because they are misunderstood and do not claim what others have suggested about gain or height. The truth of these two charts are not noted in the images, but in the captions for the images, and without consideration for the words, the ideas are just plain misleading and wrong.
View attachment IMG.pdf
The science at the time and the study had nothing at all to do with armature radio, in fact the study was regarding ground wave technology which does not even apply above the range of 1-2 megahertz much less 3 megs where armature radio begins and higher.
You might be able to find the article on the Internet, but you need to understand some of history regarding this period in order to be able to separate out the wheat from the chaff. I have no proof, but there are foot notes in Reynolds article that may provide more to the story. You will note right off that he does not even mention .64 wavelength and neither did the study.
I have read another article years ago that I've looked for repeatedly and am unable to find. The article is about the Japanese doing a study to discount what the Americans had done in the 1920's concerning Broadcast Radio Antenna development, and thus the account of their ignored and overlooked advantages of the .64 wavelength as being superior to the 5/8 wave.
During this time in history the Japanese were Imperialistic and wanted to rule the world and they started crap with every one that showed to be getting ahead in this world on any score.
If you read Reynold's report and Cebik's recap report on Reynolds report, you will start to get a new view that discounts much of the advantages that have been attributed to the ideas for the 5/8 wave...say nothing about the .64 wave which only existed in the minds of the Japs.
IMO, all of the CBBS on this subject comes from the misunderstandings that are pervasively based on actual facts noted in the original report, but with a slant to the positive that is in error and totally misconstrued. The most glaring thing I find is the iconic charts for gain and height noted below. These two charts are noted on Fig. 3, page 102, of ARRL's Antenna Compendium and they may be right on the money accurate, but the implications in the CB world of what they represent are totally false, because they are misunderstood and do not claim what others have suggested about gain or height. The truth of these two charts are not noted in the images, but in the captions for the images, and without consideration for the words, the ideas are just plain misleading and wrong.
View attachment IMG.pdf
Last edited:
Nice little Radiogate! I noticed toward the end, just before he moved frequency, that you were rockin' & rollin' over the hornets nest by a good amount.
Maybe when you switched to the AP was when you faded out...?
You could use a little more audio 'kick' but gees, what a signal you hammer out there! You sounded about 30-50Hz lower in frequency than his receiver was set.
That's how you sounded, (if not even a little louder!) when we talked.
I've got to get mine on-line so I can show off MY meter movement!
...for a .64 I-10K you should have right about 22' 9.5", no top hat. See if that doesn't offer decent performance to those 40-70 mile stations.
007, I didn't have my antennas on my switchbox at the time I heard 4040, so I didn't switch. My hope was to actually record the GM vs. AP switching and to see if we could hear any clarity changes along with maybe a signal change like I sometimes do on my end. We did another video several days earlier, but that video got lost while processing on his end to youtube and that one I did do some switching.
Conditions do change and it seemed that everybody was dropping down at that time I think. You will note though, my audio was still on top, meaning only that everyone in his ear hole at the time was rising and falling about the same. I've never even heard my radios, much less my own voice like that. I'm grateful to get the chance to do that and see just how country town hickey I sound.
I wasn't about to move and go too far off frequency and loose the contact, are you kidding? Scott is using rack gear and likes his stuff in the base in order to get that mellow sound which he likes. Evey one sounds high beside him.
007, that model does not even have tapered sections in the radiator, I'm not spending any more detailed time on modeling, cause no body believes but what they want to believe anyway. I only did the Sigma4 where I tried desperately to get every dimension as close to right as I could. Maybe I didn't prove a pure and accurate model, but I did disprove the BS about it can't be done using Eznec, tapered tubing, and anything but very thin wires...if you want to see the model show gain at a good low angle. I personally don't believe that modeling is really all about being that accurate, cause close is enough and physical testing is going to be the ultimate test to be done if at all. The world uses models all the time, in everything under the sun and we always hear about the problems associated with such results. How is your local weatherman?
Nothing in the human experience is 100% or we don't get close to it. Those are the imperfections of life. I have no doubt that your experiences were what you saw, but when I see my meter tell me one minute the GM is an Sunit better and clearer audio, and in the next minute the AstroPlane, or the A99, of the I-10K is better, how do we explain that? If you can do that then you should be doing the testing. I have no vested interest in any result. I have my favorites, of course, but I'm ready to change my mind in a minute, as soon as anyone gives me a good enough argument. 007, IMO a two inch adjustment to any of these antennas are not likely to make any remarkable change in performance that I'm going to see working my radio.
Thanks for responding.
You are right Mike, I suggested that just to be kind to my detractors who would refute me saying, "...heck, you don't have a matching device and didn't even tune the damn antenna."
You know Bill, in dealing with your Eznec models that they dont respond magically like most might think when making a change in certain areas, while other areas change on you just thinking about a change.
I agree completely with your last truism George.
You are right again Jack, all I do with an antenna that require matching is try and get the value for X as close to zero as possible. I don't know for sure, but I believe that if I could effectively model the design the trombone matcher into the model of the I-10K I made, I still believe the basic results for the pattern, gain, and angle would roughly be the same.
How about those discussions on modeling you talked about Willie, when you get time of course.
Last edited:
Scott 2CT4040 is in our DX Group and a very good friend of mine,this video gate shows to me that the GM is competing with many stations that I bet are running far greater power......40 over "S" 9 is not too shody, even under "Skip" conditions.
Scott 2CT4040 is in our DX Group and a very good friend of mine,this video gate shows to me that the GM is competing with many stations that I bet are running far greater power......40 over "S" 9 is not too shody, even under "Skip" conditions.
Yep Oggy, when I heard the first of that video and all the traffic, I said, "Oh, Boy" I won't even be heard. I was very surprised at only 39' feet, but like I've said before the very good soil around me helps.
I feel a lot better about the GM now, and of course something like that builds confidence and encourages you "go for it."
Yes Scott, we were on 38 lsb 4040 Scott's new Yaesu.