Yes it will work just fine. If you're going to build it why not make a fan dipole, just make different wires for each band.
-
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 Search for the Perfect Antenna . . .
- Thread starter Riverman
- Start date
You could make a fan dipole or take the g5rv approach if you want to experiment. Find a length of antenna and feedline that gives you a reasonable swr on a few bands. Start with the measurements for a g5rv jr and go from there.
You could also use a trapped dipole.
Cobweb is still at the forefront but Alpha's ProMaster 10-80 is gaining ground and the HyEndFed 10/15/20/40 hung from a 40' Spiderbeam telescoping pole is moving up fast.
http://alphaantenna.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=61
https://hyendcompany.nl/antenna/mul...ail/150/HyEndFed_4_Band_100_Watt_Classic#prod
http://alphaantenna.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=61
https://hyendcompany.nl/antenna/mul...ail/150/HyEndFed_4_Band_100_Watt_Classic#prod
Oh, oh. Got a latecomer to the contest.
It's a hamstick dipole. It's a fan dipole. It's BOTH! It's MFJ's new OCTOPUS!
https://www.hamradio.com/detail.cfm?pid=H0-016465
Rather than 10/20/40/75 meters as Eric uses in the video, I'm thinking 6/10/15/20 for improved efficiency.
Havin' fun now!
It's a hamstick dipole. It's a fan dipole. It's BOTH! It's MFJ's new OCTOPUS!
https://www.hamradio.com/detail.cfm?pid=H0-016465
Rather than 10/20/40/75 meters as Eric uses in the video, I'm thinking 6/10/15/20 for improved efficiency.
Havin' fun now!
I seem to remember a set of crossed dipoles that was supposed to give dipole performance but in an omnidirectional pattern, I believe it was called a "turnstile". I wonder if this could be set up as a two band turnstile eliminating the need to rotate it.
The Octopus is cool, but as a permanent base antenna the Cobweb wins the arm-wrestling contest between the two for these reasons:
a. More efficient (full length wire dipoles versus shortened hamsticks)
b. Smaller footprint (9' square vs 14' square)
c. Cheaper ($229 versus $260 (Cost of Octopus base + eight MFJ hamsticks)
a. More efficient (full length wire dipoles versus shortened hamsticks)
b. Smaller footprint (9' square vs 14' square)
c. Cheaper ($229 versus $260 (Cost of Octopus base + eight MFJ hamsticks)
Not sure. Everything I've read about the Octopus says each pair of hamsticks is somewhat directional like any horizontal dipole. Especially the higher it's mounted.
On a turnstile its basically two dipoles in a cross, off the end of one dipole is broadside to the other. So it would take two pair of identical hamsticks to make one array. Of course this would mean you could only set it up for half as many bands.
I did a bit of googling after my last post though and did find a problem, the two dipoles that make up the system aren't fed in phase so I don't think the connections in that thing would work. Of course you could probably work that out but at that point the thing becomes nothing more than an expensive mount.
So just forget I said anything.
I did a bit of googling after my last post though and did find a problem, the two dipoles that make up the system aren't fed in phase so I don't think the connections in that thing would work. Of course you could probably work that out but at that point the thing becomes nothing more than an expensive mount.
So just forget I said anything.
Last edited:
On a turnstile its basically two dipoles in a cross, off the end of one dipole is broadside to the other. So it would take two pair of identical hamsticks to make one array. Of course this would mean you could only set it up for half as many bands.
I did a bit of googling after my last post though and did find a problem, the two dipoles that make up the system aren't fed in phase so I don't think the connections in that thing would work. Of course you could probably work that out but at that point the thing becomes nothing more than an expensive mount.
So just forget I said anything.
Oh, I misunderstood what you were saying. Now I get it.
One pair covers east/west and the other north/south.
Never heard of the turnstile dipole.
MFJ's selling points for the cobweb are: "Omni-directional. No radials needed! Works great at low heights."
Is the low heights claim hogwash? Regular horizontal dipoles need height to improve take-off angle, among other things. Does the shape of the cobweb's dipoles affect how they perform at low heights? Anyone?
Is the low heights claim hogwash? Regular horizontal dipoles need height to improve take-off angle, among other things. Does the shape of the cobweb's dipoles affect how they perform at low heights? Anyone?
You can always find someone that will tell you an antenna works great but I'm not knocking the cobweb if it fits your needs. Low height will hurt it just like it does a dipole because the lower it is the more ground loss you have. I would rather have a dipole or doublet which are also omni directional when low to the ground relative to the frequency you're using. It may be a decent antenna but I think there's some creative advertising there.
Had a idea about the cobweb. What if small "L" bracket is added to the top of the mast and the antenna is mounted vertically? I believe one benefit of vertical dipoles over horizontal ones is a lower take-off angle. Don't know if this would apply to the cobweb given the shape of its dipoles.
Guess you could do this with the Octopus as well. Vertically, it would have one vertical dipole, two slopers and one horizontal.
Guess you could do this with the Octopus as well. Vertically, it would have one vertical dipole, two slopers and one horizontal.