There are some vital points left out of this analysis. A horizontal
dipole antenna is only superior when aimed accurately at the particular
station you want to hear. It is very directional. A vertical antenna is
less focused as far as interference, but is omni directional, which is
far superior when the listening station is one that moves and turns.
Does anyone remember the brief period when embedded dipole windshield
antennas in cars were a "thing"? Everyone got over that failed
experiment pretty quickly, and went back to vertical whips. How well do
you suppose a horizontal antenna would work for your VHF? :-)
Bill Bina
On 3/2/2016 9:33 AM, Michael Brown via CnC-List wrote:
The splitter works well, worth the price.
There are some technical challenges to consider. A VHF antenna will be
tuned
( some better than others ) to 157 MHz. FM is 88 - 108 MHz. The better the
VHF antenna the less FM signal strength it will pass through. The FM
station
has a choice of polarizing the signal vertically, horizontally, most
do both.
The vertical whip antenna picks up the vertical version, which is
considered
to be more susceptible to interference.
It may be that a FM specific dipole will work as well.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/PHILMORE-5035-DIPOLE-FM-ANTENNA-w-MOTOROLA-PLUG-FITS-VINTAGE-VHF-SCANNERS-/151928946680
28.5" each side is the correct length for FM.
In the style of YMMV, if you have a well tuned VHF antenna with a 50'
run to the spiltter, then another 10' run to
the radio trying to pick up a "college" station around 88 MHz with
horizontal polarization is not going to work well.
Michael Brown
Windburn
C&C 30-1
_______________________________________________
Email address:
[email protected]
To change your list preferences, including unsubscribing -- go to the bottom of
page at:
http://cnc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/cnc-list_cnc-list.com
