> ... Why are we modifying the Arrow? > ... Because someone's analysis says the element length is all wrong ...
So Al Lowe's software program which he used to design these is all wrong? Sorry to get defensive on Al's behalf. This thread just "feels" like a re-hash of an "engineer's view vs. real world results" argument. Like when I was told here - by engineers - that it mattered how I twisted my Arrow while working the sats. "Ya gotta take polarization into account, Clint - there's a 22db difference when you turn your antenna 90 degrees - a tremendous performance hit if you don't take this into account ... " Yet in the real world of demonstrating workin' the birds, there's no such performance degradation. I have hundreds of witnesses to this fact: Capture SO-50 and AO-51 with the Arrow and operate TX and RX while twisting the antenna in different angles doesn't change the great reception and transmission quality. If you are in the market for an Arrow, I simply suggest that you use it as offered to you. You will be pleased with its 2M and 440 amateur bands performance. And leave the modding of the elements w-a-y on the bottom of your "things to do" lists. Clint Bradford ---------------------------------- Clint Bradford, K6LCS http://www.clintbradford.com _______________________________________________ Sent via [email protected]. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
