rick martin wrote:
dBi Ringo Ranger and the use of dBi I like it to a
subterranean isotropic radiator.
I think a Heathkit cantenna radiates better.
Let us not be too caustic, folks:
I had occasion to slap one up for a 'quicky' packet station -- tuned
with a tape-measure, ty-wrapped
Well I have gone back to Decibel catalogue 23. Older books discarded. I am
pretty sure that at one time the DB224 was rated at 4.5 dBd, and then later
at 6 dBd., but this is from memory, I can't find an older catalogue.
Regarding a clean and shiny antenna, we had a discussion at coffee. The
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Steve Bosshard \(NU5D\)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well I have gone back to Decibel catalogue 23. Older books
discarded. I am
pretty sure that at one time the DB224 was rated at 4.5 dBd, and
then later
at 6 dBd., but this is from memory, I can't find
: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Antenna Gain Specs
Well I have gone back to Decibel catalogue 23. Older books discarded. I
am
pretty sure that at one time the DB224 was rated at 4.5 dBd, and then
later
at 6 dBd., but this is from memory, I can't find an older catalogue.
Regarding a clean and shiny
Gary,
Most of the commerical guys do have test ranges and some very
detailed and well engineered.
Most common below 1 GHz antennas were around long before computers
like the PC were avialable and their technology, although sound and
good, are old, go back into the 50s.
Some of the broadcast
Mark,
Right on the Diamond package is dbd, not dbi. However, I do not
believe if in dbi.
73, ron, n9ee/r
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, N9WYS [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I believe Diamond uses gain over **isotropic** (dBi) for their
rating
specs... which might account for the
Paul Holm wrote:
Reading the replies that mentioned gain specs, I can't help but think of our
last ham club meeting. An older member persuaded the club to replace the
VHF repeater antenna with a Diamond X500HNA rather than a DB-224 because the
Diamond has 8.3 dB gain.
And even worse is
@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Antenna gain specs
Gary,
Most of the commerical guys do have test ranges and some very
detailed and well engineered.
Most common below 1 GHz antennas were around long before computers
like the PC were avialable and their technology, although
At 2/20/2007 07:11 AM, you wrote:
Paul Holm wrote:
Reading the replies that mentioned gain specs, I can't help but think
of our
last ham club meeting. An older member persuaded the club to replace the
VHF repeater antenna with a Diamond X500HNA rather than a DB-224
because the
Diamond
When it comes to gain, the Diamond probably really has 8.3 dBi.
That's probably true Bob. And the grapes to grapes comparison would
suggest that a DB224 also has ~8.3dbi of gain.
The real
difference between the two antennas is pattern shape (DB224 has a
cleaner
pattern; the
What I don't understand is how at times the DB224 is rated at 4.5 dBd, then 6
dBd, and the DB304 (twice as much aluminum) rated at 6.1 dBd. over a span of
30 years...de nu5d
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Steven Samuel Bosshard
\(NU5D\) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What I don't understand is how at times the DB224 is rated at 4.5
dBd, then 6 dBd,
H that's a new one. Where/when and what frequency range have
you seen the DB224 rated at 4.5dbd?
and
But don't mount it upside down. The base is not waterproof when
inverted -
I learned that the hard way!
73 - Jim W5ZIT
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 3:19 PM
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Antenna gain specs
-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Repeater-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Laryn Lohman
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 5:59 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Antenna gain specs
--- In Repeater-Builder
I belive the double dipole (304) was supposed to have a more omni-directional
pattern (the books show a 'normalized' pattern) - I will have to dig out some
old DB Products catalogs, or call Lloyd Alcorn in Waco (he designed the 224 for
DB before he and Kit Parsons and Larry Bush started Wacom
Reading the replies that mentioned gain specs, I can't help but think of our
last ham club meeting. An older member persuaded the club to replace the
VHF repeater antenna with a Diamond X500HNA rather than a DB-224 because the
Diamond has 8.3 dB gain.
- Original Message -
From: Jim
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Paul Holm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Reading the replies that mentioned gain specs, I can't help but
think of our
last ham club meeting. An older member persuaded the club to
replace the
VHF repeater antenna with a Diamond X500HNA rather than a DB-224
I believe Diamond uses gain over **isotropic** (dBi) for their rating
specs... which might account for the extra ~2.2dB.
(If memory serves me the difference between dBi and dBd is about 2.2 - yes?)
This is one reason to be careful about what the respective company is using
for their
-Original Message-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Repeater-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Laryn Lohman
Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 8:27 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Antenna gain specs
--- In Repeater-Builder
Sometimes if you just ask the question Relative to what! All manufactures
don't base there Gain spec on Unity Gain of a Dipole,
Some have there own Base Spec , and nobody knows what it is , I am always
leery of companies that tend to always have the most of
everything . The Company I worked
At 2/19/2007 17:27, you wrote:
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, Paul Holm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Reading the replies that mentioned gain specs, I can't help but
think of our
last ham club meeting. An older member persuaded the club to
replace the
VHF repeater antenna with a
At 2/19/2007 17:51, you wrote:
I believe Diamond uses gain over **isotropic** (dBi) for their rating
specs... which might account for the extra ~2.2dB.
(If memory serves me the difference between dBi and dBd is about 2.2 - yes?)
2.12 dB, to be exact.
This is one reason to be careful about what
22 matches
Mail list logo
