New thread to debate V-4000

[Shockwave]

Now if you could only connect that statement to a contradiction in anything I've said in the past, you might have made your first valid point since joining the forum. If you did your homework before jumping to conclusions, you would know I've said the CST model was given to me by Sirio.

 

[Shockwave]

It's a shame that only make animations, and shows no fields or radiation patterns, no gain, no grades, no nothing, bad, expensive and good it is ...
It's a shame

greetings.

Ernesto CX2GK

I know, but since those animations are so simple why not just post the one associated with your far field model? Since there is NO WAY you're going to do that I'll tell everyone why now. It would force you to show a picture of the dipole antenna you tried to trick everyone into thinking was a model of the Vector. You really are showing the type of person you are better than I could.

 

[AudioShockwav]

Never-mind, hopeless.
really don't get it

You decide.

We try hard to look at all points of view and the antenna section can be a hotbed at times, but we have to keep it at some kind of adult/respectful level.

 

[Captain Kilowatt]

Nosepc, answer this:
Why do you keep referring to the Vector as " The Dominator" ?
For years people have been talking about this antenna here calling it by it various 11 meter names , but you make it a point to call it by the name of a VHF FM broadcast antenna?
What is the rest of the story?

AudioShockwav.

This discussion include:

message #42 Shockwave:

".......My video was generated by the most advanced electromagnetic software analyzing tool money can buy and the model was built by an engineer familiar with using the program........."


It's a shame that only make animations, and shows no fields or radiation patterns, no gain, no grades, no nothing, bad, expensive and good it is ...
It's a shame

greetings.

Ernesto CX2GK

Why don't you simply answer the question that Audioshockwav asked you instead of quoting and commenting on a post that Shockwave made under the pretense of answering it?

 

[AudioShockwav]

There is volumes of good info posted about this antenna here from home-brew on up.
If you take the time to read members like Bob85, Shockwave and others have already contributed a lot of good feedback about the design and theory of the antenna.
And several have home-brewed and tested and modeled and tweaked and debated and discussed.....
really?
Nosepc did this last time he was here.
He just keeps going around in circles hellbent on the j pole rant and likes to single out a specific brand of FM broadcast antenna.
Who knows, maybe he sells the ones being replaced.
He is on vacation, again, back to the antenna.....

73
Jeff z

 

[bob85]

wondered when somebody in the uk would start manufacturing them
http://www.vortexantennas.co.uk/shop/q82-vertical-11m/

 

[Robb]

285 quid?
A bit pricey.

 

[bob85]

yes its expensive, quality tube is expensive here.

 

[AudioShockwav]

That looks like a VERY robust build and construction reminds me of Jays antenna, also pricey, and built like a brick shit house.

73
Jeff

 

[bob85]

a good design is getting the balance between wind load, weight and strength right,
vortex take a different approach to construction than me jeff,

the quasar sounds expensive until you start buying quality materials to build your own. its easy enough to do on the cheap if you live in the usa but not here,

the vortex is significantly cheaper than importing an i-10k, its more compact for small yards & uses better quality tube,
if they got it right it will have better performance when mounted on the same mast,

i don't know the guys at vortex.

 

[Henry HPSD]

Hello Guys,

The quaser has been discussed by G3TXQ.
He wrote something int the line of:
That a coaxial Q section has more loss than a coil.
So, yes...there maybe no coil, and no loss there, however...
The Q section which is there to match the antenna will provide more loss.

Im missing that input on this forum.
Perhaps there are those who want to debate the matching system.

And dont get me wrong here, not trying to put him in a bad spotlight..
I actually phoned him with the idea of combining forces, as i think im a better designer, i like his mechanical efforts and he seems to have a better line to produce more...as my time is limited due to different reasons. Sadly he didnt pick up that phone, and i never tried again.

I wonder why alu should be so expensive in the UK ?, from a logical point of view i guess there isnt a big difference between either UK/Holland, but perhaps there is...
Is there a specific reason ?

What i do understand is that it is impossible for "us" guys, making a living
if you are going for "low pricing".
You wouldnt believe the time and costs involved.
I can certainly "value" the money asked.

Look at a 5/8 wave antenna: there are other options for the EU guys..
My personal favourite would be this one:

http://www.winklerantennenbau.de/xa27_l.htm

The diameters are still large enough to withstand heavy wind conditions.
A decent amount of radials, can handle a more power than the specifics...
And can be enlarged easy.

Best of all...a very good value for money figure.
Its difficult to compete with those who have "eastern EU" connections hihi.

Kind regards,

H.

 

[bob85]

henry,
i don't know what the 6082-t6 that vortex uses costs here but .058 wall 6061-t6 drawn tube to replace the bottom section of a sigma4 at the only place i could find over here that stocked it and sold in small quantity would have cost over £100

i don't like the q section matching at all, i know a guy that has one and he fried it with much less than the claimed power rating, it was no surprise to me,

the insulator is comical,

people here don't want quality antennas today or to be more accurate few cbers are willing to pay for quality.

 

[Henry HPSD]

Hi Bob !

Very accurate you are...
Its a good thing constructing for some is a hobby

The alu...
The price you mention, it actually made me look several times to re-read again.
It is far..far too expensive.

If u need anything..drop me an email.

Kind regards,

H.

 

[The DB]

That a coaxial Q section has more loss than a coil.
So, yes...there maybe no coil, and no loss there, however...
The Q section which is there to match the antenna will provide more loss.

Im missing that input on this forum.
Perhaps there are those who want to debate the matching system.

Actually, I don't see the point to such a debate as the differences in losses from their matching system, which is nothing more than a standard stub match, to a more standard style like what other manufacturers tend to use, are small enough that, in the real world, you will never notice the difference...

Wow, was that one sentence? I must be long winded today...


The DB

 

[bob85]

DB
the reason i don't like the matching is mainly the power rating,
When you put that kind of fire in your wire that's exactly what you will get,

you have very high vswr in the section of coax above the stub so power rating for that section of coax should be reduced accordingly,

i also think it will be more lossy than the trombone on my i-10k or any decent shunt feed that does not have lossy dielectric or skinny high resistance wire, not less loss as is hinted at in the advertising blurb,

im not saying you would notice it on air but you don't get any advantage over conventional antennas, and it has limited retuning potential for average joe.