| Author |
Message |
    
Karatebutcher
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 23, 2002 - 4:39 pm: | 
|
Well I know the legal fcc limits, I know that the home owners assication doesn't allow antennas, so thinking right there you can only do what I did, the elevation here is seven hundred feet, I live on a very small hill,it is above the other homes , it may be sixty feet above the flat land, so I put it low in a tree and only about four foot above the house, I get good DX NEW YORK, FLORDIA, HAWATTI, but every time I go
outside I want to raise it more, but it is safe and hidden now. I am my own worse enemy. |
bruce
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 24, 2002 - 11:35 am: |
|
If your clear of most trees and buildings your high enough |
Karatebutcher
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 24, 2002 - 4:36 pm: |
|
Thank you BRUCE, I am above the homes around here and it is pretty well conceled where it is, the skip does come in ok, and I do get out ok when there are contacks, so I guess I will leave it alone, there is always the feeling of doing more. |
Hawk
| | Posted on Thursday, September 19, 2002 - 4:25 am: |
|
Just think, you can hide a set of beams in the tree and have the whole tree turn so no one would know what your doin! "Hawk" |
Karatebutcher
| | Posted on Thursday, September 19, 2002 - 11:06 am: |
|
HAWK, I will consider your answer, maybe better I could put the beam in the tree, and I could have you sit in the tree with a piece of string tied to your ear, and when I pull the string you can turn the antenna. |
Taz
| | Posted on Thursday, September 19, 2002 - 11:46 am: |
|
hahaha |
bruce
| | Posted on Friday, September 20, 2002 - 7:58 am: |
|
Taz in HAM RADIO there is a saying " You know your antenna was high enough and big enough if the wind just blew it down ! " |
Taz
| | Posted on Friday, September 20, 2002 - 10:25 am: |
|
lol |
Insider
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 25, 2002 - 9:18 pm: |
|
There's some locals out there that recommend that I get the antenna up higher for better performance; what do you think?
Antron 99 mounted on the peak of my roof, 3 story house. Distance from ground to the coax feedpoint about 38 feet.
Height of the antenna above the roof from where the radiating portion of the antenna begins, about 2-3 feet
Pitch of the roof, uncertain, but pitched very steaply.
Distance between antenna and other structures, around 20 feet.
System VSWR 1.2:1 on Ch 1 and 1:1 on ch 40 with any lenght of coax attached the the antenna (he, he).
The set up as is gets out and receives well, though there's a few distant contacts out there that others can hear that I can't and they think getting the antenna a good ten feet above the roof will improve things.
Do you think it's worth the effort to raise the antenna more?
P.S. the other locals that can hear some of the short dx stations better are about 1.5 to 2 miles or so closer to a body of water than I am. |
Alsworld
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 25, 2002 - 11:52 pm: |
|
Insider,
raising will only help local conditions. Your antenna sounds like a great setup. As for getting it up higher, are there trees/buildings/houses that are higher than your antenna close by that you think may be "blocking" your signal? Would the additional 10 ft make that big of a difference?
Here is my philosophy on the subject. Each antenna has it's own "lobes" depending on how it is set up. While your local friends may be on the strong side, you may be on a weaker side. It's a possibility that may have nothing to do with your heighth. Than again, maybe it does. Do your friends all run A99's or different antenna's? Maybe they just have better receiving antenna's? Just some thoughts. I'm not trying to put down your A99. I hear too many of those cross country. just giving some suggestions. Good luck
Alsworld |
Marconi
| | Posted on Thursday, September 26, 2002 - 6:34 am: |
|
Insider, the deal with some locals hearing something that you don't hear may be cured or may not be cured by raising the antenna. There is a lot of stuff on earth that affects ground wave type signals. This can happen at any height because there could be a big building, tower, or other structure affecting the signals to some stations, as you note, out in the distance. So your just raising the antenna may not be as productive as you think. By most standards, you are high enough. Based on your description, if what you have is sturdy and secure, I would just live with the situation. Sounds like it might be a bit dangerous trying to raise that one up higher.
Unless you are talking about salt water, like in the oceans and seas, the only advantage a body of water can offer your buddies is the openess they may get being very close to open water at their locations. This is like raising your antenna to avoid stuff, closer to earth, in the way of your signal. They might also just be in a hot area or they could simply be closer to the station you don't hear so well, who knows why. Remember, out by the lake, most of the time there is not much stuff around except maybe trees, and trees are for the most part not a big problem. If you could really check it out, you may find that the guys near the lake probably have a similar problem with some stations around and that has to do with radiating patterns.
From your description, it sounds like everything is working just fine to me. Hang in there.
Marconi |
Marconi
| | Posted on Thursday, September 26, 2002 - 6:51 am: |
|
Well I have to completely agree with Alsworld.
Marconi |
Insider
| | Posted on Thursday, September 26, 2002 - 2:35 pm: |
|
Thanks for the opinions. I figured as much. The manual does recommend that the antenna be 9 feet above the roof, but I think that raising it from its currant place wouldn't make a big improvement.
To answer the question, yes they are near bodies of salt water and it was my opinion that 1-2 miles closer could mean the difference between hearing someone and not One of them has a beam, so I'm excluding him from the comparison and the other has an A99, but the noise floor is lower where he is, as there's an interstate highway practically in my backyard (lots of bleedover).
Some just don't seem to want to get that all those things affect the "readability" of an s1 signal.
Again, thanks for all the input. The antenna height will stay as is until I replace it with a new one. |
Alsworld
| | Posted on Thursday, September 26, 2002 - 4:25 pm: |
|
Insider,
for what it's worth, months ago I e-mailed Marconi asking his advice/opinion on mounting an antenna above a metal roof. I was trying to see how it would affect the SWR and learn more about the ground plane affect. That is a few years in the future for me but he explained how certain variables come into play, cause and affect so to speak. One of those could be SWR. You have great SWR's so you have done it right for sure.
A couple things you may consider in future purchases. The A99 is a half wave antenna, roughly 17.5 ft long (high). If you wanted to get higher with out changing your mounting system/feed point height, you might go with a 5/8th wave. The overall length is longer (Imax 2000 about 24 ft, Army Big Stick 21+, not sure on Maco's). Anyway, it could give you roughly four to six feet more antenna without ever changing your mounting system.
Now with that said, I don't know if it will really make a difference in the receive. I took down a new 1/2 wave antenna and put up a new IMAX 2000 in a better location here at my house. I honestly cannot say I noticed a difference talking to locals, and they saw no difference in my signal (until I installed new doubleshielded low-loss coax). The coax helped my transmit strength (old coax was bad) but receive seemed to stay about the same as with my 1/2 wave prior as best I can tell. The local I refer to is 20 miles as the crow flies. Other locals a few miles farther seemed to notice more of a difference.
Was it the Imax 2000? the height? I'm not sure, but new coax sure helped my transmit tremendously, but then again I knew my old coax was in sad shape.
So what is my point? Heck I forgot. LOL! Aw sometimes it sucks to be me....hehehe
Alsworld |
Insider
| | Posted on Thursday, September 26, 2002 - 6:52 pm: |
|
Ha, ha... The station in question is probably 40 plus miles away as the crow flies, and runnng barefoot, I think. The local with the A99 has a weak copy on him, so I think it's that 1-2 miles further making all the difference due to the power to distance relationship and the effects of his signal hitting the antenna from different points causing fading to be more noticable.
I find antennas very interesting, even more so than amps. Maybe it's because despite all the complex electronics in radio equipment, the last thing your signal sees on transmit and the first thing it sees on receive is often nothing more than a piece of wire in semi-free space. |
bullet/151 southern Indiana
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 02, 2002 - 2:53 am: |
|
thats why i fuss over my antenna system more than my radio system. |
bruce
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 02, 2002 - 5:11 am: |
|
There are 3 things that determin how well you will get out Antenna, antenna and more antenna. |
HoosierCardinal
| | Posted on Saturday, October 19, 2002 - 5:37 pm: |
|
If you cant get out get a linear... LOL
thats the first thing most guys do anyways.... |
Taz
| | Posted on Saturday, October 19, 2002 - 6:13 pm: |
|
yeah, get a linear when they realize the swr is a 4.0 and poof. When it all goes poof your going to be getting out really well! To the store that is to buy more. |
SaddleTramp
| | Posted on Thursday, January 02, 2003 - 12:32 am: |
|
Yer hi' nuff when airline pilots complain! |
bruce
| | Posted on Thursday, January 02, 2003 - 4:59 am: |
|
Saddle
The LAW is ovet 180 foot you have to have lights on it.
The rule that mosr radio guys would rather use is if the blue sky is BELOW me when i look out then its tall enough.
HE HE HE
Bruce |
Tech833
| | Posted on Thursday, January 02, 2003 - 12:15 pm: |
|
Bruce,
The joint FAA and FCC rules state that a tower of 200 feet AGL or higher must be registered and have obstruction markings on it. For daytime, that usually means orange and white paint or strobes. For night that usually means lights or strobes.
A structure less than 200 feet tall may require markings as well if it fails a glide slope test. See http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/AsrSearch/towairSearch.jsp
Like I have said before... Welcome to my world.
|
bruce
| | Posted on Thursday, January 02, 2003 - 12:38 pm: |
|
833
Here you better light up anything that stands tall! Now here in this county we have few towers over 150 foot since we have 4 airports within 20 miles and one is only 4 miles i guess we fall under the glide slope part no mater what the hightest point within 50 miles is 100 foot! Im at 60 just 15 foot below ridge road the hightest point within 30 miles at 50 foot up from the ground here like my on old tower you can see Tampa 20 miles away and the buildings of the intercoastal which goes into the gulf of mexico. A 30 foot high antenna here is more than good enough.
Bruce |
|
