Quote:
Originally Posted by Tower Guy
To call that "UHF mostly" is a "spin" that causes me to get dizzy.
|
Please don't get so dizzy that you fall off the tower, the ladder, or the roof.
Yes, I know of Ken Nist's evaluations. However, those evaluations are of the loop geometry and do not include the (highly) variable reception afforded by the feedline/balun. As I noted, you have to know how to exploit the feature which isn't documented so it is understandable if it isn't known or understood by most.
Hey, I don't like using it for VHF/FM and I don't recommend using it for such, but, from numerous hands-on hours spent with both the antenna and a spectrum analyzer, I think it's safe to say that I know how the antenna works (and doesn't). Given that I have toys in my toy box than most people don't have, I do have a distinct advantage over the public. It isn't spin when you know what you're talking about.
Given that the reception on VHF is so iffy with the C2, the boss finally approved a design change that will add a simple VHF dipole with a diplexer to the C2 to allow a measurable and predictable level of high-VHF reception. We'll likely get the first shipment of this version in early this summer. I don't know where they'll end up, but I suspect they'll go to one of our large retail partners. The VHF add-on isn't pretty, but we were interested in getting something out there that works better and the current version. Our mechanical designer is working on something more aesthetically acceptable. I field-tested the C2 with dipole two weeks ago and found that it performs as well as can be expected - about unity gain on high-VHF channels 8 & 12. I expect it will be somewhat adequate for near-in (urban and suburban) high-VHF reception in uncomplicated situations. This will be a big improvement over the current "UHF mostly" model.