• 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.
  • The Feb 2025 Radioddity Giveaway Results are In! Click Here to see who won!

Reply to thread

I feel the same way Jazz.




I think we agree that the cone does block the currents between L1 and L2 due to the currents being out of phase and their magnitudes being near equal, thus causing cancellation...as I recall  you noting earlier in your remarks.


This response is incomplete, as most conditions such as this tend to be in radio...and thus we have some radiation from the cone. I just consider this current small and antenna mode currents, while I think Donald considers the currents significant and Common Mode type Currents, maybe even similar to what we see in the Gain Master and T2LT. This is not intended to twist his words on the subject, but it is what I think he sees.




Well, I agree with you that the cone has a high impedance at the top and a low impedance at the bottom in the case with a S4 design, and Jazz that is exactly why I don't consider the S4 cone as coaxial. IMO this describes a rather poor radiator, and my analogy of this happening we see in a coaxial pigtail connection.


In every other case of CMC's flowing that I have ever seen is flowing out of a imbalanced low impedance point like the feed point. In those cases the suggested remedy is to create a high impedance point...using a choke or balun at the same point.




I understand their describing the cone as a transmission line, but it is not constructed with the proper dimensional ratios that coax does. The only reason they call the cone a transmission line is because the elements are near parallel, and the currents are out of phase. Do you think the bad currents on the radiator that is out of phase at this point with the top 1/2 wave and cancelled and the constructive currents on the radials are left free to radiate with their full current magnitude. If so, how do we account for the cancellation? Said another way, do we just contend that the bad currents are cancelled leaving the good currents to radiate? I don't think cancellation works that way.




Either way Jazz, you still have to simulate the proper construction for coax, which IMO will not work...taking the shape of a cone.


Here is a real event story as best I can recall. Back in the day I use to use RG8 inside of a 1.25" x 1/4 wave aluminum tube out of the feed point on my StarDuster. I attached the shield of the coax to the base of this tube which I used to mount the antenna. I called it a bazooka balun from an idea I read in a 1980's magazine article I posted below. This was some years before I met Bob of course.


Bob questioned that idea, and instead suggested I use smaller RG8x or RG58 type coax. I don't want to twist Bob words, so I ask why did Bob suggest that? Was it because the bigger diameter RG8 coax was not as close to the construction diameters of real coax in the small tubing I used and thus it did not act like coax...like I thought?




I under stand that idea too Jazz...but have you ever tested it. The idea has merit, but I would be surprised if you can even tell without some more high tech equipment, much better than a CBer will likely use. This is like I find most of the time when reading more technical articles on antennas...the differences they often claim are miniscule in most cases. I can't remember the discussion, but I think I said that to Bob the other day on an article by Cebik that he posted for us to consider.




I've heard about this monster, but I do not have any opinions on it.




Well Jazz, you let me know when you figure it out. I hope one day we get this S4 design idea all igure out...so I might need to find something else to talk about.




I don't think HyGain considered this claim as wrong...they saw two current maximums on that antenna...even using early 1900's period ideas and math. It is collinear, even if it stretches the rules as we understand them today.




Well you could make a bundle off of them two old cheating lying boys I sent my CLR2 coil too a while back. You don't want to be doing business with them though...I lost $2.00 dollars postage dealing with them.:cautious:








I have never worked a J-Pole, but the idea looks very interesting. I can possibly see why Sirio might call their NV4K a coaxial J-Pole, and that must be hard to explain by some.




Jazz, that is my feeling too. We agree on the SD'r, and now this...are we in trouble?




I was just trying to poke some fun at Bob the other day.


I don't agree with the love in your past time, but to each his own, OK?


Check out the article on the balun idea below.