Trucker antenna
Douglas W Adair
or am I just skin pipe dreaming at the petro?
Dave
> I like them two at a time--co-phased. Is there any gain to be had that way
> or am I just skin pipe dreaming at the petro?
>
>
nulls. A single omnidirectional radiator is optimal for a moving
station, unless you have means to steer the lobes whilst steering the
vehicle.
They do look bad-ass, but just connect one of them and you'll have
better overall performance (theoretically).
Dave
You could phase them for favoring the direction of travel, I suppose.
That might be the idea.
mopeyz...@yahoo.com
Hal Rosser
to the back with a decreased propogation to the sides.
This is usually desirable if traveling on a mostly straight stretch of
highway. I think the spacing is a little too far apart for use on most cars.
"Douglas W Adair" <n8...@allr.net> wrote in message
news:ggu32u$4i7$1...@news.motzarella.org...
JIMMIE
> If fed in phase and spaced correctly, there could be gain to the front and
> to the back with a decreased propogation to the sides.
> This is usually desirable if traveling on a mostly straight stretch of
> highway. I think the spacing is a little too far apart for use on most cars.
>
>
>
>
> >I like them two at a time--co-phased. Is there any gain to be had that way
>
> - Show quoted text -
I figure this is for an 18 wheeler on CB. In that case the dual
antennas make the patern more omni. Back in the 70s I belonged to a CB
club and we did some test of the effects of auto body styles on
radiation patterns. We discovered body stle and mounting location were
as important if not more so than the antena you were using.
An 18 wheeler with a single antenna mounted on a mirror has a really
ragged radiation pattern. Two antennas makes it a lot less ragged,
still a far way from being omni-directional.
Jimmie
Bob Bob
roof (so it doesnt hit bridges etc) would work better than a mirror mount...
How much roof to bridge etc clearance is there normally?
I would have a thought a DDRR would have been good too but I read
something recently that mentioned performance has never been as good as
expected.
Thoughts?
Cheers Bob
richard
wrote:
>I like them two at a time--co-phased. Is there any gain to be had that way
>or am I just skin pipe dreaming at the petro?
>
Not much on a big truck.
Since most of the usable cophased signal is blocked by the cab and
trailer. I've found a single antenna works just as good.
What hurts the system the most, is the factory installed crap.
They generally use the smaller 75ohm cable and use splice after splice
to make it work. I generally get my own cable, bypass their stuff.
One thing to remember in cophasing, cable length DOES make a
difference. If they are not equal, things will be out of whack. Unlike
in a single antenna where length is not an issue.
Oh and for all you loudmouths out there, the only reason they say you
must have x amount of feet, is to sell the damn cable.
In reality, the shorter the cable, the better off you are.
Have you held an FCC license for radio work?
I have.
JIMMIE
> On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 08:05:31 -0500, "Douglas W Adair" <n8...@allr.net>
> wrote:
>
> >I like them two at a time--co-phased. Is there any gain to be had that way
> >or am I just skin pipe dreaming at the petro?
>
> Not much on a big truck.
> Since most of the usable cophased signal is blocked by the cab and
> trailer. I've found a single antenna works just as good.
>
> What hurts the system the most, is the factory installed crap.
> They generally use the smaller 75ohm cable and use splice after splice
> to make it work. I generally get my own cable, bypass their stuff.
>
less than 50 ohms 75 ohm cable may not be the best choice to make a
phaasing harness. Most of the time 50 ohm cable works better
Dave Platt
>>or am I just skin pipe dreaming at the petro?
>If fed in phase and spaced correctly, there could be gain to the front and
>to the back with a decreased propogation to the sides.
>This is usually desirable if traveling on a mostly straight stretch of
>highway. I think the spacing is a little too far apart for use on most cars.
I believe you're correct. This is a "broadside array" configuration.
Its gain over a single radiator rises roughly linearly (measured in dB
over a single radiator) up to separations of around 5/8 wavelength. A
separation of 1/2 wavelength gives around 4 dB gain over a single
radiator and a very nice clean pattern (deep null to the sides) - this
is the spacing most frequently described in the literature (e.g.
Kraus, Terman) for broadside arrays. Gain maxes out at just under 5
dB at a 5/8-wavelength spacing (at the cost of a small side-lobe).
[Figures are from the ARRL Antenna Book of a few years ago]
Whether it's worth doing for a vehicle-mobile system is another
question. You need more than .4 wavelengths of separation to get 3 dB
of gain (half a nominal S-unit) - at 11-meter frequencies that's around
14 feet of separation, which I think not many vehicles will allow.
Perhaps if you're driving a "wide load" transporter truck?
At 6 feet of separation between antennas you'd have only around .2
wavelength, which yields less than 1 dB of gain over a single
radiator. Hardly seems cost-effective.
It might make more sense for 2-meter operation... but as most 2-meter
mobile seems to be repeater-based, you really want omni rather than
shaped-beam-down-the-road most of the time.
There's also the matching issue. Each radiator in the array will have
a feedpoint impedance different than what would have if used alone.
You'll have to take this into account when designing the phasing
harness, and you may need an impedance-matching network at the
combining point to establish the 50-ohm load that your transceiver
expects. If you don't match properly your transceiver won't see the
load it expects, and may not deliver full rated power into the load -
you could easily lose more signal strength this way than the array
will gain back. If you do match properly, there will be some amount
of loss in the matching network.
There ain't no free lunch, alas.
--
Dave Platt <dpl...@radagast.org> AE6EO
Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
news:vvac06-...@radagast.org...
Wow, Richard.
This guy seems 7 fuckloads smarter than you.
Wonder if he ever "held an FCC license for radio work"?
>
> --
> Dave Platt <dpl...@radagast.org> AE6EO
> Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
> I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
> boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!
--
Popeye
"Best thing for him, really. His therapy
was going nowhere," -Hannibal Lector.
www.finalprotectivefire.com
http://picasaweb.google.com/Popeye8762
The Honorable Dr. Rocky Roads Presiding Judge
"Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick" <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote in
message news:koGdncO3mpLVf67U...@supernews.com...
>
> This guy seems 7 fuckloads smarter than you.
That coming from someone that lost the internet in his truck because he
didn't know when to stop? ROTFLMAO
"Fuckin Sprint shut me down without warning"
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.transport.trucking/msg/0f0ccb6f15cac165
Top
news:ggu32u$4i7$1...@news.motzarella.org:
> I like them two at a time--co-phased. Is there any gain to
> be had that way or am I just skin pipe dreaming at the
> petro?
>
>
If you are going to co-phase get a comercially produced co-phase
harness. Mount the anteneas 54" apart for cb band.
The Honorable Dr. Rocky Roads Presiding Judge
"Top" <t...@neo.rr.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns9B6770730EE1...@130.133.1.4...
>
> If you are going to co-phase get a comercially produced co-phase
> harness. Mount the anteneas 54" apart for cb band.
Please list your references
richard
If i had said it, you would have a field day accusing me of all kinds
of shit.
Since the late 60's i've been working with CB and have done all kinds
of experiments with antennas on a car. You name it, I had it.
As he pointed out, the big problem with CB is, you need way much more
space than a vehicle offers to truly get any usable gain from
cophasing.
Do you know the wavelength of 11 meters?
if 27 feet, the normal height of base antenna, is equal to 5/8 or 1/4
wave, then what is 8/8 or 100%? Well over 100 feet.
So to get the true proportion for proper cophasing, the road aint wide
enough and neither is the vehicle.
The only reason truckers run two antennas is because it looks cooler.
The effectiveness of cophasing in a truck is screwed by the factory
installed crap.
NightRogue
"The Honorable Dr. Rocky Roads Presiding Judge" <woo...@att.net> wrote in
message news:z9ydneDlBcZ0nanU...@giganews.com...
>
> "Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick" <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote in
> message news:koGdncO3mpLVf67U...@supernews.com...
> >
> > This guy seems 7 fuckloads smarter than you.
>
> That coming from someone that lost the internet in his truck because he
> didn't know when to stop? ROTFLMAO
And this from the coward who forgot to set her brakes and blamed it on
someone who was not only NOT there, but was in a different state posting on
here, and she calls everyone else and "idiot"?? That's funny as hell.
Top
news:cp48j4l95glmkjhdu...@4ax.com:
You still didn't give any useful information. No surpise since
you have none. For an average of the cb band running 1/4 wave
the antennas should be spaced 54 inches apart. Use a
commercially produced cophase harness if you can find it. Make
sure you match the SWR and you will out do any other mobile
off the front or rear.
Toop
Top
news:_GUYk.404979$TT4.56720@attbi_s22:
How many days has he been a rookie now?
The Honorable Dr. Rocky Roads Presiding Judge
trolls
Dave
"Douglas W Adair" <n8...@allr.net> wrote in message
news:ggu32u$4i7$1...@news.motzarella.org...
>I like them two at a time--co-phased. Is there any gain to be had that way
>or am I just skin pipe dreaming at the petro?
>
the real gain in that arrangement is in the thickness of the sales man's
wallet.
The Honorable Dr. Rocky Roads Presiding Judge
They certainly look better just like dual stacks look better than a
single stack.
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
>
Thanks Top!
RHF
<wook...@att.net> wrote:
> Dave wrote:
> > "Douglas W Adair" <n8...@allr.net> wrote in message
> >news:ggu32u$4i7$1...@news.motzarella.org...
> > >I like them two at a time--co-phased. Is there any gain to be had that way
> > >or am I just skin pipe dreaming at the petro?
>
> > the real gain in that arrangement is in the thickness of the sales man's
> > wallet.
>
- look better than a single stack.
breaker, Breaker. BREAKER !
Ken I Gita Ray Di Oh Checka !?!
The Honorable Dr. Rocky Roads Presiding Judge
than I.
Dave Platt
>> Top
> Thanks Top!
I think that Top's calculations (and recommendations) are a bit off?
CB has an 11-meter wavelength. There are just over 39 inches in a
meter. Hence, the wavelength is around 430 inches.
A 54-inch separation is only .12 wavelength. From the chart in the
ARRL Antenna Book, it looks as if you'll get less than .5 dB of
directional gain, compared with a single radiator of the same type and
size. That's less than one tenth (!) of a nominal S-unit. You'd be
very hard put to be able to detect this small of a difference in
practice - it'll be less than the amount of signal variation you'll
encounter due to reflections from nearby objects.
In terms of getting yourself a directional-gain benefit, I think a
co-phased two-radiator broadside array with a 54-inch separation is
essentially useless on CB frequencies. There just isn't enough gain
to matter.
Now, as somebody else suggested, using such an array might get you a
more consistent near-omnidirectional pattern than a single radiator
would deliver, if your antennas are mounted less than optimally (e.g.
on your sideview mirror post). Using two co-phase antennas might be
worthwhile for this reason, even if you don't get a significant amount
of directional gain.
I suspect you'd get more bang for your buck by simply mounting a
single antenna in a better location (e.g. roof mount) and paying
attention to making the antenna's grounding to the chassis/groundplane
as direct and solid as possible.
Top
news:acve06-...@radagast.org:
Cophase being omindirectional? You need to do some more
reading before you try to correct anything.
Dave Platt
Top <t...@neo.rr.invalid> wrote:
>Cophase being omindirectional? You need to do some more
>reading before you try to correct anything.
The directionality of a broadside array (with the two radiators fed
exactly in phase) depends very strongly on the separation between the
two antennas. For separations of 1/4 wavelength or less, there's very
little directionality - the pattern is very close to omnidirectional.
Every dual-antenna truck setup I've seen has been a side-by-side
mounting (e.g. one on the left mirror and one on the right), and the
harness feeds them both in-phase. I've been assuming that this was
what was being meant by "co-phase".
If so, I stand by my statement that two CB antennas, fed in phase
through a co-phase harness (i.e. no phase difference between the two),
and separated by only 54 inches, produces a nearly-omnidirectional
signal. The two antennas need to be further apart, before the pattern
becomes significantly directional.
Take a look at the NEC plots at http://www.cosjwt.com/index.php?a=20
to see... the 4.5-foot separation model produces a pattern which is
almost circular. There is little gain towards the front and back, and
very little loss off to the sides. These plots seem to jibe well with
other references I've read (Terman, Kraus, and the graphs in the ARRL
Antenna Book).
The other alternative is an end-fire array, with the antennas fed
signals of opposite phase - with these then there can be significant
directionality even with close spacing of the antennas. In a
truck-antenna system, this would require placing the antennas one in
front of the other, separating them by several feet, and inverting the
phase of the signal sent to one of the two antennas (perhaps by having
the feed coax to one antenna be 1/2-wavelength longer than the other).
You could get several dB of gain this way... but the close spacing
will cause the antenna feedpoint impedance to drop a lot, and some
form of matching network will certainly be required to keep the radio
happy and develop maximum power from the transmitter.
The two bottom plots on the site I mentioned above, show the effect of
feeding the antennas with signals of different phase. In these
examples, the pattern is being skewed off to one side - the difference
in feedline length is converting the antenna from a broadside array to
an end-fire array. With the right amount of phase shift, you end up
with a cardioid pattern, with a broad lobe in one direction and a very
deep null in the other.
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
> In article <wtadnQM_KLwfMKnU...@supernews.com>,
> Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote:
>
>>> You still didn't give any useful information. No surpise since
>>> you have none. For an average of the cb band running 1/4 wave
>>> the antennas should be spaced 54 inches apart. Use a
>>> commercially produced cophase harness if you can find it. Make
>>> sure you match the SWR and you will out do any other mobile
>>> off the front or rear.
>
>>> Top
>
>> Thanks Top!
>
> I think that Top's calculations (and recommendations) are a bit off?
I'm a "single antenna" guy myself.
I think, in a truck, at least, that "big radio" is synonymous with "big
wristwatch". :-)
We can't mount the antennae high or center, because the 13', 6" height of
the truck is where the low bridges start.
Also, most tractors have this horrific system that intergrates AM/FM with
the CB coax.
A CB stick on the left mirror and an AM/FM on the right, and a splitter in
the coax, so I always run my own coax seperately.
And I have a cellular antenna on one side, any way, for dual plane signal
boost, and it has to be 8" (I think) away from other sticks.
But hhhhhere's a question for the braintrust:
I'm after a (mobile) VHF radio that's common to northern (i.e., the Yukon,
and Northwest Territories) Canadian truckers- who don't monitor CB bands.
(info:) http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?t=171741
I'm sure, as a sine wave challenged layman, that I can't use the same
antenna and coax as my CB?
--
richard
wrote:
>In article <wtadnQM_KLwfMKnU...@supernews.com>,
>Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote:
>
>>> You still didn't give any useful information. No surpise since
>>> you have none. For an average of the cb band running 1/4 wave
>>> the antennas should be spaced 54 inches apart. Use a
>>> commercially produced cophase harness if you can find it. Make
>>> sure you match the SWR and you will out do any other mobile
>>> off the front or rear.
>
>>> Top
>
>> Thanks Top!
>
>I think that Top's calculations (and recommendations) are a bit off?
>
>CB has an 11-meter wavelength. There are just over 39 inches in a
>meter. Hence, the wavelength is around 430 inches.
Almost got it right but a little off.
The higher the "meter" the frequency gets lower.
11 meters is roughly 27mhz.
10 meters is roughly 28mhz.
2 meters is 144 mhz.
A "wave" is based on the physical length between nodes of the
frequency.
In reality, one wavelength at 27mhz is about 36 feet long.
A standard 102inch whip is a 1/4 wave antenna.
Just for you mister know it all top,
you might want to gander at this site.
http://www.cosjwt.com/index.php?a=20
It blows your 54" theory right straight to hell and then some.
As you'll see by the charts, there is virtually no difference between
1 and 2 antennas mounted on a truck.
richard
IF the cophased antennas are less than 1/4 wave apart, there is
virtually no change.
richard
wrote:
>In article <Xns9B68CB1835A9...@130.133.1.4>,
Ya gots to understand with whom you are trying to communicate.
"Top" is the master know it all who has absolutely no background in
electronics. He just drives a truck and thinks that gives him the
knowledge. You've heard of "Billy Big Rigger"? You just met the dude.
Top just goes along with what other truckers have said over the years.
I have the actual working experience to back me up with.
The only thing Top knows about CB is how to yack on it.
richard
<Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote:
No dumbshit.
As I have tried to explain to you once before, DO NOT buy one of those
radios. If you get caught with it in the USA alone, and are
transmitting on it, no license? Bye bye. Pay the $10,000 fine lose the
radio.
Every trucking company in Canada that uses them has a Canadian license
to operate them with. They are not like CB's. They are commercial
business radios.
I trust maybe now you'll listen to one of the radio experts for a
change.
Would one of you in the radio groups who knows Canadian radios please
explain this to the jerk?
He thinks that because he's a trucker, he can have any damn radio he
wants in his truck.
Zeke
Top was Military and got his commo expertise there. IIRC he's not a truck
driver at all.
Dave Platt
Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote:
> But hhhhhere's a question for the braintrust:
>
> I'm after a (mobile) VHF radio that's common to northern (i.e., the Yukon,
>and Northwest Territories) Canadian truckers- who don't monitor CB bands.
>
> (info:) http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?t=171741
>
> I'm sure, as a sine wave challenged layman, that I can't use the same
>antenna and coax as my CB?
In principle, you could combine the CB output (27 MHz) with the VHF
radio output (up above the 2-meter band) using a diplexer, and feed
the result down a single coax.
At the antenna end, you'd have a couple of choices. You can use
another diplexer to split out the HF and VHF signals, and feed them to
two separate antennas. Or, you might be able to find a single CB-type
antenna which is also capable of matching up well enough on these VHF
frequencies to work tolerably well.
The chances are very poor that a randomly-selected CB antenna would
give you a tolerable SWR on the 160-or-so-MHz VHF band... and if it
did, there's no telling what its vertical radiation pattern would look
like. An antenna intended for these two bands would probably have to
be custom designed - I can think of a couple of possible ways to do
it. Such a dualband antenna would almost certainly be a compromise
antenna on both bands - it wouldn't work as well as separate antennas
designed for best operation on a single band each.
Commercial HF/VHF diplexers run somewhere around $80, last time I
looked. You'd probably find it less expensive in the end to just run
a second coax and put up a second (VHF-only) whip antenna.
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
> uuuuhhhh..... you're wrong as usual Bullishit.
>
Exactly, a matter of public record here that Richard has seen several
times previously, and just forgot.
Here's Richard's esteemed military career (and how he was caught lying
about it): http://bolo_bullis.tripod.com/
What's amazing is that Richard and I were just discussing what a total,
absolute and complete asshole he makes himself look like every time he tries
to make himself look tough or smart at anyone's expense.
Of course he can't hear a word of that, and immediately starts this.
Richard, who is also a career pedophile and damn proud of it, has had, and
will always have, the same problem, and that's that he just can't keep his
festering gob shut.
What amazes me is that he's skunked a dozen usenet groups over the years,
is internationally know as a scumbag, but still sees the world through his
own rose colored glasses, like we might have forgotten his previous and
extensive bombast and flummery.
Funny, or sad?
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
news:43raj4t26k9e1m4ik...@4ax.com...
Fuck you, dickhead.
> If you get caught with it in the USA alone, and are
> transmitting on it, no license? Bye bye. Pay the $10,000 fine lose the
> radio.
Sure.
What's the fine for my 250 watt kicker?
Don't forget to add that in.
> Every trucking company in Canada that uses them has a Canadian license
> to operate them with. They are not like CB's. They are commercial
> business radios.
>
> I trust maybe now you'll listen to one of the radio experts for a
> change.
I am.
They said the radios were available, the <private> frequencies, not the
radios, are licensed, and the freqs I'm interested are available to the
public.
And the license, if you want one, is easy and cheap.
Were your mother and father related -before- the wedding?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Because you have an uncanny resemblence to the Deliverance banjo boy.
> Would one of you in the radio groups who knows Canadian radios please
> explain this to the jerk?
> He thinks that because he's a trucker, he can have any damn radio he
> wants in his truck.
Jesus, are you stupid.
Try reading the thread that I cited, that flatly proves you wrong.
And as I already stated, and you apparently forgot, the radio would be for
emergencies only, and that I would have no reason to use it in the states.
Your memory is just shot, fuckhead, have you ever met a guy named John
Francis?
Or been to Australia?
I find it amazing that you'd be afraid of an FCC fine, that I have a
one-in-ten-million chance of -ever- receiving, while you publically brag
about being in possession of 45,000 child pornography pictures.
Amazing. Simply amazing.
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
Thanks!
That's the kind of helpful and intelligent response I was looking for.
The radio would be for emergency communications anyway, to trucks in
the -immediate- vicinity.
The 4 "LADD" frequencies are used by the scale houses up there, as well.
>
> --
> Dave Platt <dpl...@radagast.org> AE6EO
> Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
> I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
> boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!
--
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
> Ya gots to understand with whom you are trying to communicate.
> "Top" is the master know it all who has absolutely no background in
> electronics. He just drives a truck and thinks that gives him the
> knowledge. You've heard of "Billy Big Rigger"? You just met the dude.
> Top just goes along with what other truckers have said over the years.
>
> I have the actual working experience to back me up with.
> The only thing Top knows about CB is how to yack on it.
Wow.
Acer laptop: $600
20" monitor: $225
Verizon data card: $50
Watching Richtard stick his pecker in the outlet, -again-,
Priceless.
richard
<Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote:
>"Zeke" <no...@fart.ad> wrote in message news:gh40qi$gti$1...@aioe.org...
>> uuuuhhhh..... you're wrong as usual Bullishit.
>>
>> Top was <career> Military and got his commo expertise there. IIRC he's
>> not a truck driver at all.
>
>
> Exactly, a matter of public record here that Richard has seen several
>times previously, and just forgot.
Since this thread is going to groups who do not know me, I will try to
clairify the lies here.
>
> Here's Richard's esteemed military career (and how he was caught lying
>about it): http://bolo_bullis.tripod.com/
First, that is an exact copy of my dd214 acquired under the FOIA.
It states I served. Unlike the lies that promulgate from it that says
I did not.
2nd, why is the word before "discharge" blacked out? That was not done
by the US goverment. It was done to make it look more damning.
I never claimed to be anything I was not. I said I never got beyond
boot camp and my highest rank was E1. The dd214 confirms that.
I said I had enlisted for the ASA but never got involved with it.
While others claimed I had claimed to be super secret spy or in
special forces. Most of those lies were all created by "Just Taylor".
>
> What's amazing is that Richard and I were just discussing what a total,
>absolute and complete asshole he makes himself look like every time he tries
>to make himself look tough or smart at anyone's expense.
I'm not saying I am smarter than many, in this thread I have been
trying to point out that a lot of information given in this thread is
totally wrong. As have others. Why don't you pick on them, asshole.
>
> Of course he can't hear a word of that, and immediately starts this.
>
> Richard, who is also a career pedophile and damn proud of it, has had, and
>will always have, the same problem, and that's that he just can't keep his
>festering gob shut.
Pedophile being defined here as a person who others claim is a
pedophile because the damning word sticks to more feeble brains than
any other word. No one has ever proven, in 10 years, that I am, have
been, or currently am, a true pedophile. It's nothing more than ill
words on a screen.
>
> What amazes me is that he's skunked a dozen usenet groups over the years,
>is internationally know as a scumbag, but still sees the world through his
>own rose colored glasses, like we might have forgotten his previous and
>extensive bombast and flummery.
While shitheads like you keep wanting to let the world know about the
past anyway they can. No proof, just a lot of hot air.
>
> Funny, or sad?
Sad boy you are and you wore a uniform? God help us all.
richard
wrote:
>In article <W46dnbfJTIiCcqnU...@supernews.com>,
Trust me. he has no clues as to what you just said.
This fool wants to run a vhf radio in Canada just to talk to Canadian
truckers. He thinks those radios can be bought and used just like a
CB.
As I have operated radios on 47mhz, held a 2nd class fcc license, I
think I know a lot more than he does.
Dave Platt
Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote:
> The radio would be for emergency communications anyway, to trucks in
>the -immediate- vicinity.
>
> The 4 "LADD" frequencies are used by the scale houses up there, as well.
I'd offer a "metoo" for some advice you got from another poster... do
NOT operate unlicensed. Don't even install a radio for which you
don't have whatever license is required by the law in the areas in
which you will be driving.
Planning to use the "Officer, it's only for emergency use" response,
when challenged, could be a very expensive tactic. You might find
out, the hard way, that the local regulatory body takes a "possession
is considered proof of intent to use" approach... even if you don't
get hit with criminal charges or a civil forfeiture order, you could
find that your radios are considered de facto "contraband" and are
subject to being seized without warning.
Here in the US, unlicensed operation could get you hit with equipment
confiscation and a fine of many thousands of dollars.
If you want to operate VHF, you should either get a proper license
(e.g. for business-band frequencies) or stick to radios which have no
legal requirement for a license. For example, here in the U.S., the
MURS (multi-use radio service) is a collection of a few VHF
frequencies (formerly licensed-business-band) which have been
reassigned, and which can be used without a license as long as the
radio you use is properly certificated for this purpose.
I don't know if Canada has a MURS-equivalent, or if any of the
truckers up there use it. Check the regulations before you buy.
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
> In article <fYmdnSzeMeBpCKjU...@supernews.com>,
> Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote:
>
>> The radio would be for emergency communications anyway, to trucks in
>>the -immediate- vicinity.
>>
>> The 4 "LADD" frequencies are used by the scale houses up there, as well.
>
> I'd offer a "metoo" for some advice you got from another poster... do
> NOT operate unlicensed. Don't even install a radio for which you
> don't have whatever license is required by the law in the areas in
> which you will be driving.
Thanks, but don't put too much stock in the idiot.
I don't chat on the radio, regardless of how he tries to project his own
activities on others, and from what I can discern so far, no license is
required.
I notice Richard the expert hasn't provided any such information, either.
Possibly you're not aware of this, but unlicensed 10 meter radios with
in-line amps are quite common in our trucks, and openly sold (although one
major truckstop chain was, I believe, fined after several warnings)
everywhere.
I'll be happy to get a Canadian license if I can, but, I don't need or
intend to use the licensed business frequencies.
So, if as I understand, -that's- what I need a license for, I have no need
for one.
From the cite: "The Canadian equivalent of the FCC has a site in which it
post Northwind Trucking as 165.840 MHZ.. Now in Canada they do not partition
the VHF High band into commercial 151-162 and Government 162-174 like we
do.. they are all over the place. Also They provide unlicensed LADD channels
which are used alot by trucks Ladd 1 -154.1 Ladd 2 -158.94 Ladd 3- 154.325
and Ladd 4 173.370.. Again they are all over the place with stuff up there.
Most of the action on Inuvik is on VHF. Nothing appears to be on 30-50 MHZ
and the Hospital and Airport are using UHF."
"They provide unlicensed LADD channels which are used alot by trucks"
"They provide unlicensed LADD channels which are used alot by trucks"
"They provide unlicensed LADD channels which are used alot by trucks"
"They provide unlicensed LADD channels which are used alot by trucks"
Where I drive is not where you live.
http://picasaweb.google.com/Popeye8762/20071202Yellowknife#5143243959490865794
That radio may mean the difference between freezing to death or not, or,
literally, being eaten alive.
"Officer, it's only for emergency use" is certainly preferable to that,
and, grossly unlikely anyway.
I've been through a score of vehicle inspections, with an illegal kicker
in -plain sight-, and nobody gives a damn.
They're a whole lot more concerned if we have brakes, and are sober.
Contrary to Stupid Richard's rantings, I've never seen an FCC roadblock in
35 years of driving.
> Planning to use the "Officer, it's only for emergency use" response,
> when challenged, could be a very expensive tactic. You might find
> out, the hard way, that the local regulatory body takes a "possession
> is considered proof of intent to use" approach... even if you don't
> get hit with criminal charges or a civil forfeiture order, you could
> find that your radios are considered de facto "contraband" and are
> subject to being seized without warning.
>
> Here in the US, unlicensed operation could get you hit with equipment
> confiscation and a fine of many thousands of dollars.
I'm sure that's true.
> If you want to operate VHF, you should either get a proper license
> (e.g. for business-band frequencies) or stick to radios which have no
> legal requirement for a license. For example, here in the U.S., the
> MURS (multi-use radio service) is a collection of a few VHF
> frequencies (formerly licensed-business-band) which have been
> reassigned, and which can be used without a license as long as the
> radio you use is properly certificated for this purpose.
>
> I don't know if Canada has a MURS-equivalent, or if any of the
> truckers up there use it. Check the regulations before you buy.
>
> --
> Dave Platt <dpl...@radagast.org> AE6EO
> Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
> I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
> boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!
--
The Honorable Dr. Rocky Roads Presiding Judge
"Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick" <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote in
message news:vuidnbR1n4dCRKjU...@supernews.com...
>
> Thanks, but don't put too much stock in the idiot.
You sure put a lot of stock into the idiots Dave Ruff, Shawn and
realitytrasher and the lies you post prove that asshole.
So why are you calling anybody else an idiot when you put so much stock into
Idiots just like Dave Ruff, Shawn realitytrasher and John/nightruanch do?
More at:
http://MTT.JusticeGoneWild.com
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
> On Tue, 2 Dec 2008 14:51:28 -0500, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick"
> <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote:
>
>>"Zeke" <no...@fart.ad> wrote in message news:gh40qi$gti$1...@aioe.org...
>>> uuuuhhhh..... you're wrong as usual Bullishit.
>>>
>>> Top was <career> Military and got his commo expertise there. IIRC he's
>>> not a truck driver at all.
>>
>>
>> Exactly, a matter of public record here that Richard has seen several
>>times previously, and just forgot.
>
>
> Since this thread is going to groups who do not know me, I will try to
> clairify the lies here.
<snicker>
>> Here's Richard's esteemed military career (and how he was caught lying
>>about it): http://bolo_bullis.tripod.com/
>
> First, that is an exact copy of my dd214 acquired under the FOIA.
> It states I served. Unlike the lies that promulgate from it that says
> I did not.
> 2nd, why is the word before "discharge" blacked out?
No one wonders "why".
You've had three or four decades to get a new one, and you don't, and
we -know- why.
>That was not done
> by the US goverment. It was done to make it look more damning.
> I never claimed to be anything I was not. I said I never got beyond
> boot camp and my highest rank was E1. The dd214 confirms that.
> I said I had enlisted for the ASA but never got involved with it.
> While others claimed I had claimed to be super secret spy or in
> special forces. Most of those lies were all created by "Just Taylor".
>
>>
>> What's amazing is that Richard and I were just discussing what a total,
>>absolute and complete asshole he makes himself look like every time he
>>tries
>>to make himself look tough or smart at anyone's expense.
>
> I'm not saying I am smarter than many, in this thread I have been
> trying to point out that a lot of information given in this thread is
> totally wrong. As have others. Why don't you pick on them, asshole.
But whether you're right or wrong, Richard, you can't state anything
without a demeaning attack on others, usually embarrassingly incorrect, like
you just did to Top.
It's because of your angst and poor self-esteem, probably because of the
inbreeding.
And not man enough to correct yourself, from your flagrantly idiotic rant
about Top being "billy bigrigger" (when he doesn't drive truck), a term you
use frequently, that describes, well, you and Roger, more than anyone else
here.
If Top was wrong, you could have -easily- made your point without being
abrasive, as others did, yet you attacked.
Which is why -you're- always attacked.
Because you DESERVE it, Richard.
You actively -earn- the animosity of others, because you CAN'T KEEP YOUR
FUCKING MOUTH SHUT.
>> Of course he can't hear a word of that, and immediately starts this.
>>
>> Richard, who is also a career pedophile and damn proud of it, has had,
>> and
>>will always have, the same problem, and that's that he just can't keep his
>>festering gob shut.
>
> Pedophile being defined here
No, Richard.
No.
Not "pedophile being defined" however it's convenient to you.
Pedophile -has- a definition, and I've posted it many times, with your
grossly inapropriate posting history.
It's a matter of -permanent- record, Richard, and you can't spin puppy
shit into butterscotch pudding.
>as a person who others claim is a
> pedophile because the damning word sticks to more feeble brains than
> any other word. No one has ever proven, in 10 years, that I am, have
> been, or currently am, a true pedophile. It's nothing more than ill
> words on a screen.
>
>>
>> What amazes me is that he's skunked a dozen usenet groups over the
>> years,
>>is internationally know as a scumbag, but still sees the world through his
>>own rose colored glasses, like we might have forgotten his previous and
>>extensive bombast and flummery.
>
> While shitheads like you keep wanting to let the world know about the
> past anyway they can. No proof, just a lot of hot air.
I just state the facts, -with- the proof.
You're the one with the revolving definitions and X-files DD214.
You could clear that discharge up -anytime-, and choose to make excuses
instead.
We -know- why, Richard.
>> Funny, or sad?
>
> Sad boy you are
If I was any happier, I'd have to be -two- people.
>and you wore a uniform?
Yeah, for an entire enlistment, imagine that.
I know that's a foriegn concept to you.
>God help us all.
Worry about yourself, dude.
Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick
Not a fuckin clue, Richard, and not ashamed to admit it.
What ever it is, I can learn it, teach it to myself.
I'm not afraid to ask questions, like the one that set you off on this
rant, and I'm not afraid to ask for help.
It's -easy- when you're a man.
> This fool wants to run a vhf radio in Canada just to talk to Canadian
> truckers.
That's all in your mind, a baseless lie you repeat with no evidence.
I've stated, clearly and concisely, what the radio is for.
It's your projection of your own actions that leaves you apoplectic.
I'm sure when you're on the radio that you irritate working drivers for
miles, till they won't respond to you anymore, and then you key the mike on
pathetic country music.
Since -you- do that, -everybody- must...
>He thinks those radios can be bought and used just like a
> CB.
Well, sort of, yes.
My CB is illegal too... ;-)
And no one gives a -damn-.
My 78 Suburban has a ten meter radio and a boat radio in it, neither with
a license, for twenty years now.
> As I have operated radios on 47mhz, held a 2nd class fcc license, I
> think I know a lot more than he does.
No one cares.
Still waiting for you, 10 posts later, to provide some actual information
instead of the screeching and wailing.
NightRogue
"The Honorable Dr. Rocky Roads Presiding Judge" <woo...@att.net> wrote in
message news:g4WdnTene8G9bKjU...@giganews.com...
Quit your crying and get over your loss coward, and just go and buy a new
boyfriend doll..
Top
news:cpqaj45pnt8bn7ao5...@4ax.com:
Dave let's agree to our own experiences.
Now to Richard
You forgot who you are talking to again. Nothing unusual for
you to get things wrong. I don't drive a truck unless you are
talking about a pickup. As far as electronics backround I was
in communications in the Army. I spent a good bit of time in
the field in sitiuations where I had no backup so I had to
know enough to make things work when they broke. I don't mean
simple backpack radios either. Then there was the year I spent
teaching radio wave propagation. Another year teaching
programming small and meduim size telephone switches. In 2005
(well after I had retired) I spent the year assembling boards
to build MRI machines. If you think I have no electronics
knowledge then as usual you brain is no bigger than you little
toe.
Top
news:dlqaj45820fa9r9kd...@4ax.com:
I love it when you make an ass of yourself.
Cecil Moore
> richard <mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>> IF the cophased antennas are less than 1/4 wave apart,
>> there is virtually no change.
>
> I love it when you make an ass of yourself.
The ARRL Antenna Book says that with 1/8WL spacing,
one can achieve 4.1 dB gain with a high F/B ratio.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com
Dave Platt
Cecil Moore <nos...@w5dxp.com> wrote:
>>> IF the cophased antennas are less than 1/4 wave apart,
>>> there is virtually no change.
>> I love it when you make an ass of yourself.
>The ARRL Antenna Book says that with 1/8WL spacing,
>one can achieve 4.1 dB gain with a high F/B ratio.
Cite, please? For which antenna configuration and phasing?
I believe that the high (4.1 dB) figure you are quoting is for an
end-fire array, with the two antennas being fed 180 degrees out of
phase. Good gain, but somewhat tricky to feed and match due to the
low feedpoint impedance and the potential for high losses.
In a truck-antenna situation this would require placing the antennas
in a front/back arrangement, not side-to-side. I'm told that this is
rarely feasible.
The usual two-antenna truck arrangement I've seen is with antennas
side-to-side (one on each rear-view mirror), fed in phase. This is a
broadside array, not an end-fire array.
From all I can see (ARRL Antenna Book, Kraus, Terman), a two-radiator
in-phase broadside array doesn't start to achieve significant gain
(and pattern non-circularity) until you have at least 3/8 wavelength
of separation between the radiators. A 1/4-wave separation yields
only around 1.1 dB of gain, which (by my calculations) works out to
about a 15% increase in useful range in the preferred direction.
My book's at home, but my recollection is that you can't get 4.1 dB of
gain out of a two-radiator in-phase broadside array until you have
more than 1/2 wavelength of distance between the radiators.
David G. Nagel
Unfortunatly for you he is correct about cophased antennas less than 1/4
lambda. What the antennas do is to merge the distorted wave patterns
of each antenna into one pattern. Each antenna displays a slightly
distorted pattern that favors the side of your truck that it is mounted
on. The two patterns equal one centered pattern.
Dave N
Cecil Moore
> I believe that the high (4.1 dB) figure you are quoting is for an
> end-fire array, with the two antennas being fed 180 degrees out of
> phase.
Actually 135 degree phasing and a cardioid pattern.
180 degree phasing results in a figure-8 pattern with
3.3 dB gain.
Was out of town during the holidays and didn't realize
that the earlier statement was limited to a side-by-side
configuration.
> In a truck-antenna situation this would require placing the antennas
> in a front/back arrangement, not side-to-side.
Yes, but what better place than the top of a metal
trailer? Years ago, I helped a CB friend in AZ install
one on his motor home with about 5 foot spacing if I
remember correctly. Measured front to side ratio was
huge.
JIMMIE
That would be some pretty short antennas on top of a semi trailer.
I had an arrangement like that on a school bus turned RV many years
ago. It worked great until I found a low underpass in Waycross Ga.
Jimmie
Top
news:_nKZk.8504$x%.2184@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com:
Forgive me and my apologies to Dave Platt. This was not meant
for him.
Jim Lux
Guys.. this is nowhere near a "two 1/4 monopoles over a uniform ground"
that you're seeing in the handbook.
The antennas are 30cm or so from a big metal box (the tractor), and
possibly in close proximity to a even bigger metal box (the trailer).
Before one starts going on about whether you get any gain from two
antennas 1/8 wave apart or whatever, look at whether it has any
practical benefit in terms of, for instance, filling in nulls.
Modeling (either computational or on a range) would answer
So would practical experience. I suspect that there's enough "real"
benefit from the dual whip configuration that it persists.
Dave Platt
Jim Lux <james...@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>Guys.. this is nowhere near a "two 1/4 monopoles over a uniform ground"
>that you're seeing in the handbook.
>
>The antennas are 30cm or so from a big metal box (the tractor), and
>possibly in close proximity to a even bigger metal box (the trailer).
>
>Before one starts going on about whether you get any gain from two
>antennas 1/8 wave apart or whatever, look at whether it has any
>practical benefit in terms of, for instance, filling in nulls.
That potential (and quite possibly real) benefit has already been
mentioned a couple of times in this thread.
>So would practical experience. I suspect that there's enough "real"
>benefit from the dual whip configuration that it persists.
I strongly suspect that you're right, and I think I've been trying to
make that very point. The benefit to a typical two-antenna truck
setup isn't that it provides a lot of gain (and thus a
non-omnidirectional pattern), because in fact it doesn't (the spacing
is too small). Rather, the practical pattern is going to be closer to
a true omnidirectional pattern than can be achieved by a single
side-mounted antenna alone. The final pattern may actually have
*less* gain in a few directions, but may have shallower nulls and thus
a more consistent overall coverage.
It's one of those weird situations, in which the reason for the
benefit that can be perceived is actually just the *opposite* of what
one may believe at first!
I must admit a bit of scepticism in re Cecil's suggestion to use a
90-degree-phase-shifted endfire array feed... at least, for most car
and trucking applications. Granted, it'd give quite a bit of gain in
the forward direction... but at the expense of a deep null in the
rearward. It'd be great for speaking with the guy a few miles in
front of you... but you'd lose the ability to talk well with the guy a
few miles in back of you. If every vehicle used this sort of antenna
pattern, overall coverage would probably be worse (4 dB of gain in the
forward direction wouldn't compensate for a 10 or 20 dB null in the
rear direction of the next vehicle).
Cecil Moore
> Before one starts going on about whether you get any gain from two
> antennas 1/8 wave apart or whatever, look at whether it has any
> practical benefit in terms of, for instance, filling in nulls.
The theory is that for mobile CB, one wants radiated energy
distributed up and down the highway, not to the sides.
Cecil Moore
> I must admit a bit of scepticism in re Cecil's suggestion to use a
> 90-degree-phase-shifted endfire array feed... at least, for most car
> and trucking applications. Granted, it'd give quite a bit of gain in
> the forward direction... but at the expense of a deep null in the
> rearward. It'd be great for speaking with the guy a few miles in
> front of you... but you'd lose the ability to talk well with the guy a
> few miles in back of you.
You would also lose interference from the rear. Simply
arrange a switched phase-shifting feedline that can aim
the beam forward or backward. It's like a Yagi mounted
on a motorhome.
JosephKK
<Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote:
>"richard" <mem...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
>news:cpqaj45pnt8bn7ao5...@4ax.com...
>
>> Ya gots to understand with whom you are trying to communicate.
>> "Top" is the master know it all who has absolutely no background in
>> electronics. He just drives a truck and thinks that gives him the
>> knowledge. You've heard of "Billy Big Rigger"? You just met the dude.
>> Top just goes along with what other truckers have said over the years.
>>
>> I have the actual working experience to back me up with.
>> The only thing Top knows about CB is how to yack on it.
>
> Wow.
>
> Acer laptop: $600
>
> 20" monitor: $225
>
> Verizon data card: $50
>
> Watching Richtard stick his pecker in the outlet, -again-,
>
> Priceless.
Is he two prong or three prong?
CNR
JosephKK
Presiding Judge" <woo...@att.net> wrote:
>Phuck off you scumbag loser. Nobody and I mean nobody is a better trucker
>than I.
>
Well you might be, then again you might be a mediocre trucker who also
thinks way too much of yourself. Those who are really good just do
the doing, the mediocre boast.