Firestick II antenna - Help! SWR!
Taylor Hively
I recently intalled a new CB into my vehicle.
I decided to replace the coax and antenna with newer/better ones.
So I came across the Firestick II, which I've heard is a decent antenna.
I screwed the antenna on and began tuning it with and SWR meter. At
factory setting, the SWR needle pegged at infinity. So I began
extending the tuning screw (lengthening the antenna). As I did the SWR
began to drop.
Finally with the tuning screw all the way extended, the swr at channel 1
is about 1.2~1.3, but at channel 40 it's around 2.5+/- (ch 19 somewhere
around 2.0). This tells me that I need to extend the antenna length
still more!, but the tuning screw is totally extended.
I've considered (and might try) getting a longer bolt from the hardware
store just to see what happens, but I should not have to do this.
Do I have a defective antenna?
It's a Firestick II, Model FS4 (4 footer).
When I put my radio shack whip back on, I can tune it just fine to a 1.4
SWR at channel 19 and 2.8 at CH's 1 & 40.
In the mean time I'm back to using my RS whip.
A side note here, I wondred if anyone could tell me why the SWR goes up
when you move your hand close to (or touch) the antenna, am I
reflecting the power back into the antenna?
-Taylor
mailto:tay...@islandparadise.com
http://www.islandparadise.com/
Michael Volz
Those antennas are awful short, probably designed for use in the big
truck on one channel (19). OK, a little extreme maybe, but I have
noticed that with all helical whip type antennas-narrow banddedness,
that is.
When you are close to or touch your antenna, you are becoming part of
the antenna. Energy from your radio is going into your body (like a
microwave oven cooks food). Your body will therefore change the
resonant frequency of the antenna. Anything close will do that. That's
why it's a good idea to have the car doors closed when checking SWR; to
get it the best it can be, I guess.
73,
Mike
Ken Thompson
Michael Volz <mv...@avci.net> wrote in article <336123...@avci.net>...
: Taylor Hively wrote:
<...snip...>
: > Finally with the tuning screw all the way extended, the swr at channel
1
: > is about 1.2~1.3, but at channel 40 it's around 2.5+/- (ch 19 somewhere
: > around 2.0). This tells me that I need to extend the antenna length
: > still more!, but the tuning screw is totally extended.
: > I've considered (and might try) getting a longer bolt from the hardware
: > store just to see what happens, but I should not have to do this.
: > Do I have a defective antenna?
No, you don't have a defective antenna...yes, a longer bolt will help tune
it (try to get a brass or stainless steel bolt, if you do...)
: > It's a Firestick II, Model FS4 (4 footer).
I have one on my van - 1.2 on Ch. 18 and just under 2.0 on both 1 and 40 -
didn't check any freeband frequencies (don't have one of those radios,
anyway...heh!)
: > When I put my radio shack whip back on, I can tune it just fine to a
1.4
: > SWR at channel 19 and 2.8 at CH's 1 & 40.
Even that is a bit high - is the whip length the same between the RS and
the Firestik? Sometimes that alone can make a difference. In addition, I
don't think you made mention of where it was mounted, but the Firestik
antennas MUST have a quality ground plane, or they won't work - went
through that exercise with my father's motor home mirror mount exercise. I
ended up taking the mount and whip (it's the one on my van now...) and
getting him one of the No Ground Plane versions. {Does anyone know what
that circuit is right next to the PL-259 connector on that special harness
they use? I sure was tempted to split that shrink sleeve and take a look
under that thing, but I decided against it!} That also took nearly the
full screw length to tune it; but it flattened out to ~1.5:1 all across the
band - I was quite impressed!
: > In the mean time I'm back to using my RS whip.
You might try to tune it at mid-band (Ch. 18) for the lowest you can get
it, while just monitoring the ends of the band while tuning. Then back it
off it you want to try and flatten the resonance of the antenna across the
entire band...just to see if the response is equivalent (e.g. two-tenths at
mid-band and at the ends...)
: > A side note here, I wondered if anyone could tell me why the SWR goes
up
: > when you move your hand close to (or touch) the antenna, am I
: > reflecting the power back into the antenna?
Yes...see below.
: Those antennas are awful short, probably designed for use in the big
: truck on one channel (19). OK, a little extreme maybe, but I have
: noticed that with all helical whip type antennas-narrow banddedness,
: that is.
: When you are close to or touch your antenna, you are becoming part of
: the antenna. Energy from your radio is going into your body (like a
: microwave oven cooks food). Your body will therefore change the
: resonant frequency of the antenna. Anything close will do that. That's
: why it's a good idea to have the car doors closed when checking SWR; to
: get it the best it can be, I guess.
:
: 73,
: Mike
:
...luck to ya!
Steve Williams
Here's a trick I used on one of my antennas when it was cut too short for
another vehicle. I used two springs between the mount and the antenna. It
dropped my SWR to less than 1.5 from almost 3.0 in the same type of
situation where the antenna was too short.
Codys PC
Greetings!
In article <01bc51e8$19de68c0$290bc5a9@thompson>, "Ken Thompson"
<kwt...@azstarnet.com> writes:
...in which...
>Michael Volz <mv...@avci.net> wrote in article
<336123...@avci.net>...
>: Taylor Hively wrote:
>
><...snip...>
>
>: > Finally with the tuning screw all the way extended, the swr at
channel
>1
>: > is about 1.2~1.3, but at channel 40 it's around 2.5+/- (ch 19
somewhere
>: > around 2.0). This tells me that I need to extend the antenna length
>: > still more!, but the tuning screw is totally extended.
>
>: > I've considered (and might try) getting a longer bolt from the
hardware
>: > store just to see what happens, but I should not have to do this.
>: > Do I have a defective antenna?
>
>No, you don't have a defective antenna...yes, a longer bolt will help
tune
>it (try to get a brass or stainless steel bolt, if you do...)
>
>: > It's a Firestick II, Model FS4 (4 footer).
>
Ok, what I see here, is that there is not enough adaquate ground plane
for the FireStik to work with.
There are ways to fix this...
Relocate the antenna...
or...
Use proper rated Coax [RG8-8x(mini)-58] with an impedance of 50 ohms,
[for single antenna installations] - or for Two[twin] antennas, you need
72-75 ohm impedance coax and a splitter for co-phasing...
or...
Verify that the mount can get enough surface area around it to work -
and/or ensure that the shield of the coax is firmly attached to the
surface of the ground plane - at the antennas' mount.
Either way, looking at what you're telling us, the antenna is trying to
become resonate at a longer wavelength to counteract the lack of ground
at the base of the antenna.
The SWR meter is seeing that the Stik is resonate - but only at a very
narrow frequency bandwidth. Having to make the antenna longer in this
type of installation - is making up for the lack of counterpoise. The
narrow
frequency response tells me that there's something lacking - and it's
usually ground - either by a bad ground point because of a faulty mount,
and/or because the ground is not very conductive at the mounts' location.
Because of the antennas' design - it is suggested that the person
installing
the antenna use 18' of coax. Not because of the length, per-se, it's for
the antennas' own need of length within the coax to see a proper
impedance at the radio.
It's an inefficient way of acheiving proper SWR, which you're really not.
It's
there [lengthwise] to fool the meter and the radio into seeing the
impedance
of the coax. You still have the problem of getting that SWR down to a
useable point. At the antenna, you're not getting the full effect of what
it can do when properly tuned. You need a good length of ground - at
least 8-9 square surface feet of conductive metal - at the antennas' mount
to acheive a broadbanded SWR.
Once the counterpoise, or ground, is there - the FireStick can do very
well.
>I have one on my van - 1.2 on Ch. 18 and just under 2.0 on both 1 and 40
-
>didn't check any freeband frequencies (don't have one of those radios,
>anyway...heh!)
>
>: > When I put my radio shack whip back on, I can tune it just fine to a
>1.4
>: > SWR at channel 19 and 2.8 at CH's 1 & 40.
>
>Even that is a bit high - is the whip length the same between the RS and
>the Firestik? Sometimes that alone can make a difference. In addition, I
>don't think you made mention of where it was mounted, but the Firestik
>antennas MUST have a quality ground plane, or they won't work - went
>through that exercise with my father's motor home mirror mount exercise
Ok, so I beat that idea to a pulp ;-)
But, one thing I'd like to mention is; that lower SWR across the CB band
can be acheived much better if you use a longer antenna..4' types are
about the limit you can use, and still get an acceptable SWR across
the band [1 - 40]. Having length is the best for bandwidth and frequency
response.
Best of luck!
:+> Andy <+:
~~~One final note from the Litter Box:~~~
ATTENTION COMMERCIAL E-MAILERS!:
Do you really think I read the stuff you stuff?
- Thank You.
George Warner
cod...@aol.com (Codys PC) wrote:
>
> [other reasonable stuff snipped]
> Because of the antennas' design - it is suggested that the person
> installing
> the antenna use 18' of coax. Not because of the length, per-se, it's for
> the antennas' own need of length within the coax to see a proper
> impedance at the radio.
Firestick does suggest using 18' of coax but with no valid reason.
I tried to explain this to them. They couldn't explain why 18'
is necessary and fell back to a cheap, personal attack against me.
> It's an inefficient way of acheiving proper SWR, which you're really not.
> It's
> there [lengthwise] to fool the meter and the radio into seeing the
> impedance
> of the coax. You still have the problem of getting that SWR down to a
> useable point. At the antenna, you're not getting the full effect of what
It is a "no way" of achieving proper SWR. It does not affect the
SWR and it does not fool the meter or the radio.
George Warner
warn...@loveboat.com
Codys PC
Greetings George!
In article <warnergt-290...@cs2-13.lan.ptd.net>,
warn...@loveboat.com (George Warner) writes:
>Firestick does suggest using 18' of coax but with no valid reason.
>I tried to explain this to them. They couldn't explain why 18'
>is necessary and fell back to a cheap, personal attack against me.
Yikes, this is getting to be a problem...
They're not the only ones, another CB antenna maker claims that
"The Best match can be acheived by using 18' of RG-58 or RG-8
coax." - and thats from a Francis installation guide and warranty
card - that comes along with the antenna.
I've tried to Deduce some further understanding of the working
mechanism that causes this claim to be a workable solution -
and all I can conclude from it is the antenna is not working
in the system like it should. So that rasies other questions
regarding mount position, location of antenna - and amount
of counterpoise or ground plane for the antenna. These problems,
when ironed out - the extra length makes no difference - and
is more of a waste than it is being productive.
As was chatted and discussed [vehemently - at times] before,
the coax becomes a tunable part of the system - and since the
coax is buried within the car frame - the problems lie in the shielding
requirements and how the coaxial shield reacts to the mount,
antenna, and the vehicles' frame. I've even discussed the use of
the coax as a balun to match an unmatched antenna - perhaps
Firestiks have a type of impedance that rises [5/8] - when using the
50 ohm impedace coax as a tunable section - winds up being the
magical 18' in the formula. Considering the helical windings that
this antenna uses - it's very much possible to get a 80-100 ohm
impedance at the feedpoint. The antenna can't compensate for that
in the tuning, in some locations - due to the level of counterpoise
that exists at that particular spot. In a typical marconi or ground-
plane mount at 90 degree, or perpendicular, mounting the feedpoint
impedance of a 1/4 wave, is about 32-35 ohms impedance. Placing
a 5/8 wound in that spot, makes the system see close to 50-60 ohms
of impedance. Now, I'm referring to 5/8 wound inductive and capacitive
type of reactance at the mounts location - not a 5/8 wave [true length]
antenna - although it too, would work well. The radiation resistance
that can be measured as field strengths - are different, and the pattern
does change - but we're talking about the required tuning at the
feedpoint.
The above is what is difficult to discuss in simple terms - it requires a
long explanation to provide a means to solve the problem at hand.
Some companies realize that the counterpoise impedance - due to
the level and conductivity thats present at the users desired spot can
be far different reactively - to the antennas expected reactance - so
they wind the antenna reactively - to provide a higher impedance
initially, that can be "baluned" out
These antennas work - but many installations can't use them properly,
because of the type of impedance that it presents at the mount/feedpoint -
causing the user to look into other options. One good and strongly
recommended idea, is to locate a "Sweet spot" or location that is
resonate in both the counterpoise and radiator - and tunings a snap,
and may not be needed. Both the radiator and it's image are developed
very efficiently.
The other is more self-defeating, and is really only recommended as
a last chance/case/resort, and is the coaxial 18' length - a "magical"
number. [SIC] But, it functions as a Balun to help SWR and the
transmiters ability to see a balanced load.
Let's not get antennas efficiency and it's radiation resistance, confused
with impedance the radio "expects". These terms interact with each
other - but using the coax to boost an antennas efficiency is not going
to work, only provide a means to help reduce SWR. The radiation
resistance, as a factor of length - increases the antennas ability to
work it's radiation into the surroundings. A bad impedance problem
at the feedpoint - can be tuned out by coaxial baluns, but it's ability
to provide an efficient perfomance characteristic - is addressed
separately.
Using the coax as a balun to match a higher impedance to the
required 50 ohm impedance - still does not make the antenna
efficient - only marginal improvements at the transmitters ability
to work the load it sees. The antenna and/or location is still the
problem. However, the user is placed in a position that wishes to
see a good match/SWR, and is limited, physically, to the practical
location versus an, antenna desired, location - to operate well. So,
the myth, or balun use, is perpetuated - because they see that
it may work at the meter - but little do they realize that the field
strength at the antennas location, as a measurement of the antennas
efficienty using it's radiation resistance characteristic in working as
a load, using this type of setup - has changed very little.
People need to realize that a tuned antenna - doesn't need extra
or excessive coax length to work. However, the physical limits in
the reality of the situation, prevent many from developing an efficient
system, or the need to investigate further. So, to provide a means to
let them use the system as they see fit, the companies produce a
secondary support product, and thats the coaxial cable that's needed
to help the tuning in their particular situation.
"Use what works for you." - is real the only advice that we, as
CB'ers more serious into the hobby, can offer. To flame someone
trying to help, should be avoided - because it doesn't answer the
question, it raises more.
When I use a 5' Firestik - I have no match problems with the coax.
I use [Mini-8] and it's only 5' long, enough to get to the radio and
thats it. So, I'm beginning to believe that it's more of a mount and/or
location of the antenna, problem.
Many people can't locate the "Sweet spot" where the antenna
resonates well with the vehicles body. To some, it's an impractical
location - or they use a compromising mount that makes the
entire system suffer. They just don't have the resources, or the
need, to make required changes to establish a resonate and working
system.
Pretty much any antenna can be tuned without the need to use
"matching section" lengths. Just use good quality coax with the
proper impedance for the system you use.
>> It's an inefficient way of acheiving proper SWR, which you're really
not.
>> It's
>> there [lengthwise] to fool the meter and the radio into seeing the
>> impedance
>> of the coax. You still have the problem of getting that SWR down to a
>> useable point. At the antenna, you're not getting the full effect of
what
>
>It is a "no way" of achieving proper SWR. It does not affect the
>SWR and it does not fool the meter or the radio.
Well, then I should have said - and I normally follow this,
"Use the length of coax necessary to connect the radio to the coax,
and tune the antenna for best results." - Thank you for pointing that
out.
I wish I had the time for more research to really find out what's
happening - so I could develop a better wording to make it easier
on people trying to understand the "Why?" to it. This is what I was
trying to say, in a simple term that hopefully they could understand
better. I see I have some work to do.
But, you are correct - forgive me if the wording within message said
something else. The basics in the message I've sent pretty much
said that it's not a good idea and that you'll run into performance
problems, but you saw something different. So, I'll just leave this
topic alone and let the soothsayers, Physic friends, Quija board users,
Electronic Astrologers, and the Namesayers - have a go at it so
they can perpetuate the myths.
It's their money, not yours - or mine.
Good luck, George.
Boba Fett
So the question is...... HOW MUCH COAX IS NEEDED WHEN USING A 1/4 WAVE
ANTENNA AT 27 Mhz ON A MOBILE SETUP?????????????????????????
Casey
Boba Fett wrote:
>
> So the question is...... HOW MUCH COAX IS NEEDED WHEN USING A 1/4 WAVE
> ANTENNA AT 27 Mhz ON A MOBILE SETUP?????????????????????????
>
> cod...@aol.com (Codys PC) wrote:
> >
> >Well, then I should have said - and I normally follow this,
Codys PC
In article <336ca7f9.5714637@news>, b...@li.net (Boba Fett) writes:
>So the question is...... HOW MUCH COAX IS NEEDED WHEN USING A 1/4 WAVE
>ANTENNA AT 27 Mhz ON A MOBILE SETUP?????????????????????????
Use enough to get to the radio.
Or, what was said in the message you quoted from ...
>"Use what works for you."
If you wish to follow the Manufacturers recommendations ...
use them first. You can trim down as necessary...
Codys PC
Greetings!
In article <567cd$10911.1df@NEWS>, Steve Eklund <wa3...@compuserve.com>
writes:
>While he's at it, he takes your Kenwood 732 dual band radio
>because it looks a lot like the illegal 'export radios' that
>were also pictured in the bulletin. You now spend the next 6 weeks
>going in and out of court, spending money on lawyers and trying
>to get your equipment back. Don't say 'it will never happen',
>because it already happens every day with other people who are
>innocent victims of the stupid laws that Congress rams down
>our throats!!!
Couldn't have said it any better Steve!
It does provide the incentive to me, IMHO, that some changes need
to be made...
Some people though, are forcing change, as they see fit to their
benefit. And it affects everyone, and their future.
Nice job! Presenting this view, I mean...;-)
Dan
John Wilkerson Jr wrote:
> Dan <danbro...@mindspring.com> writes:
>
> >You folks are full of it. They are not going to storm in your
> house with
> >full riot gear to confiscate you equipment. They MUST have a
> search
> >warrant. If they come to your house and ask if they can come
> in to see
> >your equipment just say no. If you don't have anything to hide
> then let
> >them in. If by chance one of them is radio dumb and thinks
> your power
> >supply or ham rig is illegal just show him the manual. If your
> legal you
> >don't have anything to hide! All the people crying about this
> has big
> >linears and illegally modified radios.
>
> no.. that is not true. no search warrant is required if the
> investigating officer believes a crime is currently being
> committed.
>
> --
> John L. Wilkerson Jr. jwil...@netcom.com
>
> Rec.radio.cb FAQ located at my Web site:
>
http://members.tripod.com/~jwilkers/cbpage.html
>
> Supporting two-way radio for the family of the 90s.
> Spamgard(tm) in effect to attend to unwanted commercial
> email.
> Finger my account for spamgard(tm) keyword.
Plain and simple folks ...... Keep it legal and you won't have to
worry.
I haven't seen a 4 watt radio that would mess with the neighbors
phone or tv yet!
If it does then you need to get the antenna more than 4 foot off
the ground and check your SRW's
--
Visit http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/6095/
Listening to cell calls "the FAQ's".
How to unscramble voice inversion with a Motorola cordless phone.
Cordless, cellular, and Sevierville Tennessee frequencies.
Opinion & results with my Opto CUB.
*
Please remove the x from my return address. This is to prevent
the
junk e-mail messages I get from the newsgroups.
John Wilkerson Jr
Codys PC
Greetings!
In article <3370C33B...@mindspring.com>, Dan
<danbro...@mindspring.com> writes:
>All this law will do is help keep these splatter boxes off the air. I
>have seen nice built 500 watt linears that do not bother tvs and phones
>but then again I have seen a 30 watt modulation box that would wipe out
>the neighborhood
There was, and still is, a much more subtle threat that Steve
inadvertently
pointed out. It's the level of compentency at the enforcement level.
All of us need to pay attention - and that is what Steve mentioned,
and I responded to.
This isn't just for CB's, it includes - Microwave, Cellular, Business, and
Amateur radio communications. The listed above, except CB, are
licensed - CB is Type-Acceptance. The normal laws that apply to
licensed stations, excluded the CB or personal communication
radios that were not licensed.
If you remember, they're responding to a noise/interference complaint.
If they come to your home, they're going to investigate. If no
investigation,
they assume - either way, the end result is you're considered the
interfereing person causing the loss of someones personal enjoyment.
The legislation is there to prevent people from getting out of the problem
with the excuse "They're full of it", or "It's not my problem - it's
theirs."
You have to communicate and become responsible for the complaint.
It's not the end of the world, but you need to interact with the
community to a greater extent - due to the reponsibilty that you
put yourself in when you chose to use a CB radio. It's not just your
world - you have to work in "theirs" too. You've taken a stance that
indicates you're taking something for granted, it's not the case. What
you think, is not what everybody else thinks.
Part 15 protects you from the civil forfetiure that can occur - like wih
boom boxes and loud equipment. It's how you interpet a "Cease and
Desist" order - is where the battle begins. It's your freedoms versus
theirs - and how you react when things start flaring up set the
precendence on how the police and lawyers will treat you.
"Deed Restrictions" are another part of enforcement of such clauses,
except the FCC recognized this and put an end to the legal enforcement
at a local level, of a federally regulated section of our freedoms.
However,
many agreements are still binding. If you choose to live in a restricted
area - as specified "No antennas or radiating structure can be erected
or used as a means to provide such forms of communication that can
be considered potential cause, or create, interference." You are bound
by that agreement. Even though you don't want Cable TV, or Sattellite,
you can't put up a TV antenna - it's all in interpetation, signed and
delivered, and you can suffer from ingorance and their desires.
At a local level, you are responsible for your station. If you don't
cooperate - the police will assist the complaintant to a far greater
extent - than you. Your station is considered a "Controllable" problem,
and you are responsible for the operation of it, but it doesn't allow you
the excuse "It's their problem - not mine."
So, when you discuss "I've seen Linears that...", this leaves it open
for interpetation from others that can, and are - potential "victims" of
interference. The above are just some examples of how interpetation
of laws come into play at a local level. If you run a legal station, that
is one thing, you'll cooperate - you have nothing to hide, right? Running
a linear is another. "You know better" - is all I can say.
Kevin Muenzler WB5RUE
cod...@aol.com (Codys PC) writes:
-Greetings!
-
-In article <3370C33B...@mindspring.com>, Dan
-<danbro...@mindspring.com> writes:
-
->All this law will do is help keep these splatter boxes off the air. I
->have seen nice built 500 watt linears that do not bother tvs and phones
->but then again I have seen a 30 watt modulation box that would wipe out
->the neighborhood
I have and use a linear amplifier that produces 1500 watts and interferes
with nothing. The difference between mine and a "CB" amp -- mine
was built specifically for the bands it is used on. It is FCC
type accepted, meaning that it has been tested and certified not to
cause interference during normal operations.
-There was, and still is, a much more subtle threat that Steve
-inadvertently
-pointed out. It's the level of compentency at the enforcement level.
-All of us need to pay attention - and that is what Steve mentioned,
-and I responded to.
Both bills in Congress provide for training and certification of
the officers investigating the claim. This same debate was used
to fight the use of police radar to enforce the speed-limit. There
were those who said that the police would not be able to use such
a technical device. I can understand this, have you ever seen the
early police radar equipment? They had a bar-chart, not a digital
readout and required separate vehicles for the receiver and transmitter.
They weren't the simple point-and-read guns like today.
-This isn't just for CB's, it includes - Microwave, Cellular, Business, and
-Amateur radio communications. The listed above, except CB, are
-licensed - CB is Type-Acceptance. The normal laws that apply to
-licensed stations, excluded the CB or personal communication
-radios that were not licensed.
But you tend to ignore the fact that FCC Part 15 protects
ALL type-accepted equipment. IF you are using legal, type-accepted
equipment then your neighbor can't do a thing about your interference.
If you stuff is legal the police can't take it from you.
-If you remember, they're responding to a noise/interference complaint.
-If they come to your home, they're going to investigate. If no
-investigation,
-they assume - either way, the end result is you're considered the
-interfereing person causing the loss of someones personal enjoyment.
They can't get into your house without a court order or an invitation.
They can't get that court order unless they can provide evidence
to the judge that you might be operating illegally. There is
equipment that I can use while standing in front of your house that
will tell me if you are operating with too much power or distortion.
-The legislation is there to prevent people from getting out of the problem
-with the excuse "They're full of it", or "It's not my problem - it's
-theirs."
-You have to communicate and become responsible for the complaint.
No, for the zillionth time, FCC part 15 protects ALL properly and
legally operating equipment. If you are using illegal equipment then
the problem is YOURS. If your equipment is legal but has something
wrong with it the problem is still YOURS. FCC Part 15 basically
states that your equipment may not cause harmful interference and
must accept any interference that might cause undesired results.
If your equipment is FCC type accepted then it has been found by
the FCC not to cause interference under normal operating conditions.
This is what protects you and puts the burden on your neighbor because
HIS equipment "...must accept any interference that might cause undesired
results."
-It's not the end of the world, but you need to interact with the
-community to a greater extent - due to the reponsibilty that you
-put yourself in when you chose to use a CB radio. It's not just your
-world - you have to work in "theirs" too. You've taken a stance that
-indicates you're taking something for granted, it's not the case. What
-you think, is not what everybody else thinks.
-
-Part 15 protects you from the civil forfetiure that can occur - like wih
-boom boxes and loud equipment. It's how you interpet a "Cease and
-Desist" order - is where the battle begins. It's your freedoms versus
-theirs...
Now you got it. However any judge that is knowledgeable of the law
and FCC regulations would not issue a Cease and Desist order. If
you are sued then it is up to your attorney to educate the court.
- ...and how you react when things start flaring up set the
-precendence on how the police and lawyers will treat you.
You are ABSOLUTELY RIGHT here! Your attitude will almost always
dictate how you are treated by the police and the court.
<correct opinions snipped>
-At a local level, you are responsible for your station. If you don't
-cooperate - the police will assist the complaintant to a far greater
-extent - than you. Your station is considered a "Controllable" problem,
-and you are responsible for the operation of it, but it doesn't allow you
-the excuse "It's their problem - not mine."
This is where the legality of YOUR equipment comes into play. If you
are operating legal and properly operating equipment you have little,
if anything, to fear.
-So, when you discuss "I've seen Linears that...", this leaves it open
-for interpetation from others that can, and are - potential "victims" of
-interference. The above are just some examples of how interpetation
-of laws come into play at a local level. If you run a legal station, that
-is one thing, you'll cooperate - you have nothing to hide, right? Running
-a linear is another. "You know better" - is all I can say.
-
-:+> Andy <+:
Yep, that's also exactly correct.
Kevin, WB5RUE
wb5...@amsat.org
Kevin Muenzler WB5RUE
cod...@aol.com (Codys PC) writes:
Greetings!
-In article <567cd$10911.1df@NEWS>, Steve Eklund <wa3...@compuserve.com>
-writes:
-
->While he's at it, he takes your Kenwood 732 dual band radio
->because it looks a lot like the illegal 'export radios' that
->were also pictured in the bulletin. You now spend the next 6 weeks
->going in and out of court, spending money on lawyers and trying
->to get your equipment back. Don't say 'it will never happen',
->because it already happens every day with other people who are
->innocent victims of the stupid laws that Congress rams down
->our throats!!!
Yeah, I'm sure he's going to have a book with pictures in it
to check your equipment. I really feel sorry for you guys,
you must think that all law enforcement officers are idiots.
All you would have to do is show the officer your Amateur
Radio license, which you should always have in your
possession.
-Couldn't have said it any better Steve!
Probably not...
-It does provide the incentive to me, IMHO, that some changes need
-to be made...
They are being made. The FCC is making changes that will,
hopefully, get some of the illegal operators off the air.
-Some people though, are forcing change, as they see fit to their
-benefit. And it affects everyone, and their future.
Yep, this is happening right now in Amateur Radio. Some people
want force the abolition of Morse code for more, if not all,
Amateur Radio licenses.
-Nice job! Presenting this view, I mean...;-)
-:+> Andy <+:
Yep, nice job of showing everyone how ill-informed he is
on how things happen in the real world. I think he watches
too much television. Watch out for those black helicopters
guys. Hey Look....there's Elvis!
Kevin, WB5RUE
wb5...@amsat.org
Billy the Kid
On Thu, 08 May 1997 16:29:10 GMT, d...@iname.com (Billy the Kid) wrote:
>On Sun, 04 May 1997 15:16:03 GMT, b...@li.net (Boba Fett) wrote:
>
>>So the question is...... HOW MUCH COAX IS NEEDED WHEN USING A 1/4 WAVE
>>ANTENNA AT 27 Mhz ON A MOBILE SETUP?????????????????????????
>>
>>
>>
>>cod...@aol.com (Codys PC) wrote:
>>
>Since this an adjustable antenna, use the length of coax you need, it
>makes no difference.
>
>But for fixed antennas, the ones you can't adjust, the 18' length is
>recommended for standing wave purposes, since 18' is about haff a
>wavelength in the 11 meter band.
>
>David Trescak
Oh yeah, I forgot, is you can't adjust the antenna with the bolt on
top, change it! Use a shorter or longer one than there is on the
antenna. The bolt can be obtained in any hardware store!!
David Trescak
Billy the Kid
On Sun, 04 May 1997 15:16:03 GMT, b...@li.net (Boba Fett) wrote:
>So the question is...... HOW MUCH COAX IS NEEDED WHEN USING A 1/4 WAVE
>ANTENNA AT 27 Mhz ON A MOBILE SETUP?????????????????????????
>
>
>
>cod...@aol.com (Codys PC) wrote:
>
George Warner
In article <3371feb...@news.citenet.net>, d...@iname.com (Billy the
Kid) wrote:
> On Sun, 04 May 1997 15:16:03 GMT, b...@li.net (Boba Fett) wrote:
>
> >So the question is...... HOW MUCH COAX IS NEEDED WHEN USING A 1/4 WAVE
> >ANTENNA AT 27 Mhz ON A MOBILE SETUP?????????????????????????
> >
> >
> >
> >cod...@aol.com (Codys PC) wrote:
> >
> Since this an adjustable antenna, use the length of coax you need, it
> makes no difference.
>
> But for fixed antennas, the ones you can't adjust, the 18' length is
> recommended for standing wave purposes, since 18' is about haff a
> wavelength in the 11 meter band.
>
> David Trescak
18' is half a wavelength in free space; not in coax. Because
signals travel more slowly in coax, 18' is significantly more
than a half wavelength.
It makes no sense to require the coax length to be 18'.
George Warner
warn...@loveboat.com
SKBARNES
Use a half-wavelength of coax with ANY mobile antenna.
What does it do? A half-wave of coax enables the radio "to see" the same
SWR
that is at the base of the antenna, which is the true SWR.
If you don't use a half-wave of coax what happens is that you are not
reading the same SWR that is at the bottom of the antenna.
THE IMPORTANT PART: A half-wave of foam dialectric coax for CB use is
14feet 3inches.
A half-wave of plastic dialectric coax for CB use is 12foot even.
If you start using a half-wave length of coax for the first time you will
probably see
different SWR readings then you had before.THIS IS NORMAL! What you will
be reading is the TRUE SWR.
Hope this helps! Steve
George Warner
In article <19970530004...@ladder02.news.aol.com>,
skba...@aol.com (SKBARNES) wrote:
> Use a half-wavelength of coax with ANY mobile antenna.
Not necessary.
> What does it do?
It gives you about 12-14 feet of coax (depending on your coax's
velocity factor) to connect your radio to your antenna.
It does nothing else.
> A half-wave of coax enables the radio "to see" the same SWR
> that is at the base of the antenna, which is the true SWR.
The radio would see the same SWR with any other length of
coax. A half-wavelength is simply not needed.
> If you don't use a half-wave of coax what happens is that you are not
> reading the same SWR that is at the bottom of the antenna.
Here is a hypothetical question for you: Why is the SWR at the
bottom of the antenna any more important than the SWR halfway
down your coax? ...or anywhere else along the coax?
> THE IMPORTANT PART: A half-wave of foam dialectric coax for CB use is
> 14feet 3inches.
> A half-wave of plastic dialectric coax for CB use is 12foot even.
> If you start using a half-wave length of coax for the first time you will
> probably see
> different SWR readings then you had before.THIS IS NORMAL! What you will
> be reading is the TRUE SWR.
>
> Hope this helps! Steve
How is the SWR different at any point along the coax?
The correct answer is that it is not. SWR is a measurement
determined from the ratio of reflected power to forward power.
Both forward power and reflected power are constant along
the coax. How could it be elsewise? Thus, the SWR is
constant along the coax.
Steve is confusing SWR with impedance. Impedance does change
along the coax because of the phase difference between the
forward and reflected power. This relationship repeats every
1/2 wavelength. However, it does not change the SWR at any point.
George Warner
warn...@loveboat.com
tn...@muck.net
Correction ---three quarter wavelength of 78% velocity coax is 14
feet. This is electrical wavelength.
tn...@muck.net
A three quarter wavelength of 66% velocity coax is 14 feet. It is
only a half wavelength in phisical length. Don't confuse the two.
If you want your swr meter to read the correct match at the antenna,
but want to hook the swr meter at the radio, you must use a 14 foot
length of 66% coax. This of course does not change the match at the
antenna.
Boba Fett
What?????????????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
tn...@muck.net wrote in article <339360d6...@news.tir.com>...
> Correction ---three quarter wavelength of 78% velocity coax is 14
> feet. This is electrical wavelength.
>