-
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 thread to debate V-4000
- Thread starter nosepc
- Start date
made to bend as the power required to break a 5/8 ??
with prayers and words??
the VECTOR 4000 is very good for:
unless a Firestik than a 3' !!
the VECTOR 4000 is very good for:
Time to take the gloves off a little. This guy is behaving so ignorantly he can't even get his side of the argument consistent. In one breath he tells us it's just a J-Pole. That means it's a half wave radiator with near complete cancellation in the cone.
When he can't support that myth, he's forced to come up with another angle by telling everyone it's a high angle radiator. Well my friend, you can't have it both ways. Decide what direction you want to mislead the forum in so we can club you over the head with the facts.
The J-pole is not a high angle radiator any more than the Vector is. Yet you tell us it's a J-Pole and a high angle satellite antenna? You once learned that all 3/4 wave groundplanes produced the high angle effect and think you can apply that to the Vector design. That's where you're 100% wrong. This is no 3/4 wave groundplane because once you fold the radials upwards, you created a "non apparent collinear".
You'll learn this fact or behave ignorant by thinking you know more. That's your choice. You will NOT trick this forum into believing anything you may have gotten away with in other places. Going unchallenged by those who didn't understand like yourself. Good luck on your path.
for the same reason they don't use the astroplane,
pleas post an explanation of how the vector works so i can try to understand the antenna, those wizard cartoons are funny but i want some proof of how it works so i can convince these guys you are right,
shity as soon as i saw the nec plots with missing phases i though hahaha this guy don't know shit about antennas hes missing a phase and millions of hams around the world believe him hahaha, they even put that shit in the arrl and real radio books for professinals lol,
explain it to them, that thing is a cloudwarmer, im looking for your evidense but i can't see where you posted it, im thinking maybe the moderators got me blocked from seeing your posts where you prove it.
pleas post an explanation of how the vector works so i can try to understand the antenna, those wizard cartoons are funny but i want some proof of how it works so i can convince these guys you are right,
shity as soon as i saw the nec plots with missing phases i though hahaha this guy don't know shit about antennas hes missing a phase and millions of hams around the world believe him hahaha, they even put that shit in the arrl and real radio books for professinals lol,
explain it to them, that thing is a cloudwarmer, im looking for your evidense but i can't see where you posted it, im thinking maybe the moderators got me blocked from seeing your posts where you prove it.
How strange is that if the old antenna VECTOR 4000 is as good as you say, the 2 meter Ham's not do, as it is very easy to do that antenna at that frequency, probably are dumb and have not discovered it..
Just because they haven't, doesn't mean they haven't, can't, or they won't. The absence of evidence is not evidence in absence.
You have been shown why these factors work for the V4K. You have not provided any evidence of your claim that it cannot work. You have based your claims upon a modeling program, which is known to be faulty and inaccurate for modeling certain kinds of antennas as well as some aspects about antennas in general.
If you would have built a j-pole at all, you would not have made the claims about them that you did. So it is doubtful that you have built any antenna at all, let alone a dipole or a 1/4 wave. Neither would we be inclined to believe at this point if you did claim as much. You are a new ham yet you lack basic experience and come off as a know-it-all.
Build a 2m model of this antenna and see if it works as described. Otherwise, you will not have proved a thing. Nor learned a thing.
Scale the Vector for 2 meters... That may be small enough to fit on the top of my SUV... Wonder how I would mount such a design... A useful idea, that was unexpected... I would likely just get a collinear 2 meter mobile antenna though...
Seriously though, one reason they are not used for 2 meters and such are you can get a much larger 2 meter base antenna that has far more gain. I saw a 10 dBi gain 2 meter omni at a hamfest recently for about $100. It was easily twice as long as a 2 meter Vector design would be for the 2-Meter Ham band, and had much more gain. It also worked on other ham bands, which I'm not sure the vector would do very well.
The DB, back to monotoring...
The DB
Seriously though, one reason they are not used for 2 meters and such are you can get a much larger 2 meter base antenna that has far more gain. I saw a 10 dBi gain 2 meter omni at a hamfest recently for about $100. It was easily twice as long as a 2 meter Vector design would be for the 2-Meter Ham band, and had much more gain. It also worked on other ham bands, which I'm not sure the vector would do very well.
The DB, back to monotoring...
The DB
Are trying to discredit me in the same way that "wavrider". That this than that but those who do not put evidence, nothing, not even a chart, a map, a model, absolutely nothing, is you. Only words, only words, only words like a preacher.
They say the 4000 VECTOR is an antenna "open sleeve", bullshit!!
In 1st place, the VECTOR 4000 is a mass power, as a J-pole!!!
http://www.nevadaradio.co.uk/amateur...ew-vector-4000 (Type: 3/4 wave coaxial J-pole)
http://www.sirioantenne.it/prodotti_...8171169&idp=66 (3/4 λ coaxial J-pole)
not isolated.
which is similar that the Vector 4000??*
NOTHING!
"The SIGMA Vector 4000 is an antenna type open sleeve"
bullshit
PROVE IT
Each of the "evidence" presented to support what they say, it is very easy and simple to refute them, because they are based on FANTASY
All they do is attack me personally, because it is impossible scientifically refute my arguments.
They say the 4000 VECTOR is an antenna "open sleeve", bullshit!!
In 1st place, the VECTOR 4000 is a mass power, as a J-pole!!!
http://www.nevadaradio.co.uk/amateur...ew-vector-4000 (Type: 3/4 wave coaxial J-pole)
http://www.sirioantenne.it/prodotti_...8171169&idp=66 (3/4 λ coaxial J-pole)
not isolated.
which is similar that the Vector 4000??*
NOTHING!
"The SIGMA Vector 4000 is an antenna type open sleeve"
bullshit
PROVE IT
Each of the "evidence" presented to support what they say, it is very easy and simple to refute them, because they are based on FANTASY
All they do is attack me personally, because it is impossible scientifically refute my arguments.
ASTROPLANE For use in AIR NAVIGATION. <gotproof>
NEVER SAW A VECTOR 4000 and that they are good for satellites...
Are you talking about my last post with this? I hope I'm wrong in that assumption because if you are referring to my last post you are very much mistaken in the intent brought about in that post.
Besides, you don't need me to discredit you.
I do want to thank you for an interesting idea though...
And for the record, I take being called a preacher a compliment. I stated why above, feel free to go back and see for yourself...
The DB
EDIT: Interesting, there is more to that post now... It appears he wasn't referring to me specifically, sorry for cluttering up the thread...
Are trying to discredit me in the same way that "wavrider". That this than that but those who do not put evidence, nothing, not even a chart, a map, a model, absolutely nothing, is you. Only words, only words, only words like a preacher.
They say the 4000 VECTOR is an antenna "open sleeve", bullshit!!
In 1st place, the VECTOR 4000 is a mass power, as a J-pole!!!
http://www.nevadaradio.co.uk/amateur...ew-vector-4000 (Type: 3/4 wave coaxial J-pole)
http://www.sirioantenne.it/prodotti_...8171169&idp=66 (3/4 λ coaxial J-pole)
not isolated.
which is similar that the Vector 4000??*
NOTHING!
"The SIGMA Vector 4000 is an antenna type open sleeve"
bullshit
PROVE IT
Each of the "evidence" presented to support what they say, it is very easy and simple to refute them, because they are based on FANTASY
All they do is attack me personally, because it is impossible scientifically refute my arguments.
I have presented undisputable proof in both the modeling and field tests as summarized below.
With respect to modeling, the proof the Vector is a 3/4 wave, phase corrected radiator is confirmed by the presence of color outside the cone. The radiated color outside the cone matches that of the 1/2 above it. Phase correction is confirmed by the opposing color inside the cone, not allowed to radiate.
In the field we can easily confirm the 3/4 wave 270 degrees of radiation by adding an extra 1/2 wave element on top of the existing antenna and measuring the phase delay required to peak the gain in the field. If the phase shift is a full 180 degree like the basic NEC programs suggest, the antenna is a 1/2 wave.
If the antenna requires a 90 degree phase shift (and it does) that means 270 degrees of constructive radiation have already occurred below the phase shift. For that to be possible, 90 degrees of that radiator must incorporate some type of phase correction (and it does).
Without wiggling away on some abstract thought, please address either one of these pieces of proof you have requested. Keep in mind, your pictures are generated by your imagination. 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.
do not assume it is with you, I do not speak English.Sometimes the translator does not do well.
This animation?
Is very interesting, there I see all currents and phases.
Is as you say, half wave fed quarter wave. But at the bottom I see nothing collinear, if collinear, there would be no wave movement. A collinear antenna, ripples appear and disappear at the same point, as a dipole.
nosepc
This animation?
Is very interesting, there I see all currents and phases.
Is as you say, half wave fed quarter wave. But at the bottom I see nothing collinear, if collinear, there would be no wave movement. A collinear antenna, ripples appear and disappear at the same point, as a dipole.
nosepc
Sorry, but if the bottom was just a 1/4 wave feeder, it would not radiate and could not show color on the outside of the cone that relates to phase and magnitude in the models chart. The fact we have an out of phase current that has been confined inside the cone while an in phase current is present on the outside is more proof the antenna functions as Cebik said. The "non apparent collinear". Try again?
Remember, I'm not sharing my opinions or drawings I made. I'm sharing the results from the most sophisticated modeling tool available today. The animation is the direct output of the CST software based on an accurate model of this antenna.
- No one is chatting at the moment.