DB, I found a post (#226365) using the "search feature" where Homer talks about his using a 28.2' foot radiator (338" inches) and 13.75" inch mounting bracket below the hub.
He also suggested in the post that he started his build using the dimensions that Bob posted some time back. On that sheet I get the overall, from the bottom of the hub to the tip below the top hat ball, at roughly 317.50" inches when tuned near 27.205 MHz. These are the dimensions I use for my NV4K radiator models, and I think these are to specs. I also use 107" radials, set with a 30" inch diameter loop at the top. I also typically include the small top hat as well.
I figure that Homer probably started the project and later tuned his antenna and ended up with 338" inches in length using the materials, the construction, the gamma he used, and the height for his setup at the time. I also figure he is not including the top hat in his Vector. This said however, I'm not sure this post is referring to the dimensions you tell us you used.
In the post he also does not mention the radial length or the diameter for the loop he used...if he used a loop.
Have you modeled and confirmed this claim?
Back in the days Bob or Donald one suggested that a larger loop would increase the gain and a discussion is noted in the patent on column #4 at lines 23 - 36 about the radial loop.
Long ago I made some models and I saw no increase in the gain. I just repeated this work with newer models and the models showed a very modest improvement with each 10" increase in the diameter of the loop up to 50" inches. The thing I also noticed was the match got better the wider the loop. The model with the 50" inch loop showed a near perfect feed point match, but that did not relate to much difference in the gain. What the patent warned about with increasing the loop diameter was the added footprint it caused.
DB, I can't disagree and I don't use a gamma on this model. However I do set the feed point about 30" inches up the base of the radiator where the gamma connects.
This said, I see lots of antenna notables on the Internet showing us their model results and most often there are no indications that matching is included, and I think we should see a device inserted in the model somewhere near the feed point.
DB, since you can tune your Vector model at the gamma or not tune it, maybe you could confirm if there is a notable difference in gain to be noted with and without the gamma?
I will default to your claim, but at this time and with this particular antenna design I don't believe the match is bad enough to make a big difference in the gain...whether the antenna model shows to be matched or not.
I too can make a wild guess that a noticeable difference in dimensions might be the problem with our models not showing more similarity in results, and IMO the match is not an issue.
