Date   

Re: Broadband Active Antenna (experience, test, comparison)?

Martin - G8JNJ
 

Hi Leslie,

UHF Satcom, typically 225-300MHz and weather sats around 138MHz. 

https://uhf-satcom.com/satellite-reception/uhf

You need a dish or something with a bit more gain for L-Band.

Regards,

Martin - G8JNJ


Re: Broadband Active Antenna (experience, test, comparison)?

leslie norton
 

I know its a bit off CCW topic but i had to reply Martin (sorry Chris)
The Satcom your referring to is what range of frequencies.
I listen to aircraft on VHF on my white stick but monitor L band Satcom on a satellite dish.
in the range of 1537 but as you know satellite dishes are very narrow.
Are you receiving L band on a vertical?

On 6 Jan 2020, at 13:47, Martin - G8JNJ via Groups.Io <martin_ehrenfried@...> wrote:

Hi,

For general VHF / UHF monitoring the smaller white stick dual band co-linear antennas work OK. They provide a bit of gain on the UHF bands and work as a 1/4 wave on the Low VHF bands and are less conspicuous than a discone. However the out of band performance does vary somewhat depending upon the exact configuration of the internal matching network, so it's difficult to predict exactly how one type would perform on the bands you are interested in. Most types I have tried do work in the VHF and UHF aircraft bands, and you can hear Satcom downlinks with them, which is usually a good guide to performance.

One other type of antenna that has given me good results in the past, especially if you can combine it with a good mast head pre-amplifier is the 'double discone' type similar to this.

https://sigmaeurocomm.co.uk/product/double-discone-scanner-base-station-antenna-aerial/  

However they are a bit large, and may not go unnoticed once installed.

Regards,

Martin - G8JNJ


Re: Broadband Active Antenna (experience, test, comparison)?

Martin - G8JNJ
 

Hi,

For general VHF / UHF monitoring the smaller white stick dual band co-linear antennas work OK. They provide a bit of gain on the UHF bands and work as a 1/4 wave on the Low VHF bands and are less conspicuous than a discone. However the out of band performance does vary somewhat depending upon the exact configuration of the internal matching network, so it's difficult to predict exactly how one type would perform on the bands you are interested in. Most types I have tried do work in the VHF and UHF aircraft bands, and you can hear Satcom downlinks with them, which is usually a good guide to performance.

One other type of antenna that has given me good results in the past, especially if you can combine it with a good mast head pre-amplifier is the 'double discone' type similar to this.

https://sigmaeurocomm.co.uk/product/double-discone-scanner-base-station-antenna-aerial/  

However they are a bit large, and may not go unnoticed once installed.

Regards,

Martin - G8JNJ


Re: Broadband Active Antenna (experience, test, comparison)?

WA8LMF
 

On 1/5/2020 4:12 PM, Ondřej Povalač wrote:
Hi, first of all, let me say hello to the group, I am new here, this is my first post.

 I live in Europe, Czech Republic. The bandplan here is a bit different so that there is no interesting communication above 470MHz. So basicaly, I am interested in:

- UHF (400-470MHz)

- some UHF AIR Satcom (230-380MHz), 

- VHF (137-174 MHz),

- VHF AIR (118-137MHz) and 

- HF (25-87MHz).



 Until now, I am using Diamond X300 for VHF/UHF listening. Not the best, but it works. I have 5 receivers, IC-R8500, Uniden BCD536HP, Uniden SDS200, AirSpy r2 and AirSpy r0 (for web access). I just purchased the CrossCountryCommunicatons HF/VHF/UHF multicoupler for the signal distribution to the receivers. Had to use a coax switch until now, which allowed me to use only one receiver at a time. So looking forward to the multicoupler.

Now for the antenna - can anybody share any experience with the VHF/UHF performance especially when compared to discones or one of the Diamond's "white stcks" (the X series). I would like to increase the signal quality on the VHF/UHF bands, but not too sure it will be better than X300, especialy when th X300 is over 3m tall, while this antenna is only 0.8m tall.

The X300 and other similar antennas in the Diamond and Comet families are intended specifically for amateur radio operation in the 144-148 Mhz "two-meter" VHF ham band, and 430-450 MHz "70 cm" UHF ham band.  These antennas consist of multiple relatively-sharply-tuned 1/2- or 5/8-wave antenna elements stacked above each other inside the fiberglass cover. At the design frequencies, the vertical radiation pattern of the antenna is focused towards the horizon.    As you move away from these center frequencies, the pattern starts skewing upwards from the horizon and suffers reduced signal pickup "straight out" toward the horizon.  The performance in the VHF air band and the UHF tactical air band (225-400 MHz) will be poor, since the antenna will be far far away from it's design frequencies.    Oddly, though, the skewed radiation pattern (i.e. up in the air instead of at the horizon) may actually help when you are trying to pick up aircraft rather than land vehicles.

On what you call "HF" the performance will be very poor to non-existent. [Technically "HF" ends at 30 MHz, while "VHF" is 30-300 MHz).  In the US at least, the span of 30-50 Mhz is used for two-way land mobile radio, and is often referred to as "VHF low band", by contrast with the 136-174  MHz "VHF high band".  The 30-70 MHz frequency span is sometimes referred to as "NATO band", since nearly all NATO member army field radios and tank radios operate in this span.]   In any case, the VHF/UHF X300 antenna will be so far away from it's design frequencies that it will barely work at all in the VHF low band.    

Note that there are variants of the Diamond  & Comet antennas that are "tri-band" and cover the amateur radio 50-54 MHz "six meter" ham band in addition to the two higher frequency bands.   This antenna would have far more (though satill not ideal) pickup throughout the VHF low band. 


By contrast, the common discone antennas like the Icom AH-7000 will cover continuously from 30-1200 MHz. But the gain is actually NEGATIVE compared to a simple vertical half-wave dipole scaled to any given frequency; i.e. -2 dB relative to a dipole.   The discone is often referred to as being "equally bad at all frequencies", but it does have the advantage of operating with uniform performance and pattern over a far wider range of frequencies than just about any other kind of antenna.  It is quite usable for monitoring strong relatively nearby signals on any frequency. It is NOT very good for weak distant signals grazing the horizon.    It would be an ideal mate for the HF/VHF/UHF multicoupler. 

Like the white fibreglass collinear whips, the discone is vertically polarized and non-directional.  This makes it work well for mobile radio services that universally use vertical whip antennas on vehicles.   It is a poor performer for TV and FM radio broadcast services that are usually horizontally polarized.  (Some EU countries use a mix of horizontal and vertical polarization for TV broadcasting.)    I normally leave an AH-7000 connected to my communications service monitor when I have no specific requirements for higher performance or more specialized antennas.

Assuming you use a 1 meter diameter (3.1 meter circumference) loop on the CCW antenna, the results at VHF & UHF will vary wildly.   At VHF-low, where the length (circumference) of the loop conductor is short compared to the wavelength of the incoming signal, it should act like a compact magnetic loop antenna, exhibiting a pickup pattern similar to a horizontal dipole, but with the maximum pickup off the edges (not the broadside) of the loop.   At 100 Mhz (center of FM broadcast band), the wavelength is 3 meters. I.e. the antenna is now a full-wavelength loop, and will act more strongly like a standard half-wave horizontal dipole.      As you move above 100 MHz, the loop will now become multiple wavelengths long, causing the simple dipole pattern to breakup into multiple lobes at various angles with deep pickup nulls in between.   I.e. the pickup of a a given signal from a given direction will require carefully rotating the loop for best pickup.   


Stephen H. Smith    wa8lmf (at) aol.com
Skype:        WA8LMF
EchoLink:  Node #  14400  [Think bottom of the 2-meter band]
Home Page:          http://wa8lmf.net

-----   NEW!    60-Meter APRS!   HF NVIS APRS Igate Now Operating  ------
   <http://wa8lmf.ddns.net:14447/>



Live Off-The-Air APRS Activity Maps
   <http://wa8lmf.net/map>

Long-Range APRS on 30 Meters HF
   <http://wa8lmf.net/aprs/HF_APRS_Notes.htm>



Broadband Active Antenna (experience, test, comparison)?

Ondřej Povalač
 

Hi, first of all, let me say hello to the group, I am new here, this is my first post.

 I live in Europe, Czech Republic. The bandplan here is a bit different so that there is no interesting communication above 470MHz. So basicaly, I am interested in:

- UHF (400-470MHz)

- some UHF AIR Satcom (230-380MHz), 

- VHF (137-174 MHz),

- VHF AIR (118-137MHz) and 

- HF (25-87MHz).



I would like to get some user experience with the Broadband Active Antenna made by CrossCountryWireless for the above frequencies.
Until now, I am using Diamond X300 for VHF/UHF listening. Not the best, but it works. I have 5 receivers, IC-R8500, Uniden BCD536HP, Uniden SDS200, AirSpy r2 and AirSpy r0 (for web access). I just purchased the CrossCountryCommunicatons HF/VHF/UHF multicoupler for the signal distribution to the receivers. Had to use a coax switch until now, which allowed me to use only one receiver at a time. So looking forward to the multicoupler.

Now for the antenna - can anybody share any experience with the VHF/UHF performance especially when compared to discones or one of the Diamond's "white stcks" (the X series). I would like to increase the signal quality on the VHF/UHF bands, but not too sure it will be better than X300, especialy when th X300 is over 3m tall, while this antenna is only 0.8m tall.

Any experince is welcome.

Thank you,
73 de Ondrej OK2TOP


Re: My newest CCW Loop

David Cutter
 

It would be easy to compare if you had one receiver switched between 2 antenna inputs.

For most purposes it's all about signal to noise ratio, so, the lower the background noise the better.  The signal above the noise can always be amplified for your purpose.

 

David G3UNA

 

From: CrossCountryWireless@groups.io [mailto:CrossCountryWireless@groups.io] On Behalf Of Brent Mcl
Sent: 05 January 2020 17:02
To: CrossCountryWireless@groups.io
Subject: Re: [CrossCountryWireless] My newest CCW Loop

 

[Edited Message Follows]

My  perseus  on the CCW loop the wellbrock is on SDRIQ  theirs not much differences between the loop

ccw                                              wellbrook                           ccw                                             wellbrook


Re: My newest CCW Loop

Paul Gulliver
 

Paul,

Interesting results, on 7MHz, looking at the signal at 7230KHz the ccw is considerably better that the Wellbrook.

At 14MHz the Wellbrook may be a bit better but not much difference.

The noise floor seems to be about one S point higher on the ccw - not sure if that is likely to make much difference in practice so good news.

Lets hope the older models (mine) will be as good after conversion

Thanks for posting

Paul


On 05/01/2020 at 17:20, Paul Newland <newland.newland@...> wrote:
Sorry - by way of explanation of my previous (HiZ is Wellbrook) both on a SDRPlay RSPduo
Best Wishes
Paul



On Sun, 5 Jan 2020 at 16:02, Brent Mcl <blauchlin@...> wrote:
 My  perseus  on the CCW loop the wellbrock is on SDRIQ  theirs not much differences between the loop   



Re: My newest CCW Loop

Paul Newland
 

Sorry - by way of explanation of my previous (HiZ is Wellbrook) both on a SDRPlay RSPduo
Best Wishes
Paul



On Sun, 5 Jan 2020 at 16:02, Brent Mcl <blauchlin@...> wrote:
 My  perseus  on the CCW loop the wellbrock is on SDRIQ  theirs not much differences between the loop   


Re: My newest CCW Loop

Paul Newland
 

Hi Paul
Here are a couple of "snapshots" of relative noise floors on 20 and 40M (not very scientific from a real neophyte)-hope it's informative.
Best Wishes
Paul



On Sun, 5 Jan 2020 at 09:19, Paul Gulliver <paulg1953@...> wrote:
Hi Brent,

Just looking at the screen shots, on the 7MHz comparison there seems to be a lot more background noise on the ccw amp compared to the Wellbrook, (S6 compared to S2 on the Wellbrook) was this interference or was the ccw amp producing more noise?

With the 14MHz test is difficult to make a comparison as you are using 2 different pieces of software so I'm not sure if the noise level is the same or not.

Cheers,

Paul

On 05/01/2020 at 06:23, Paul Newland <newland.newland@...> wrote:
Just for interest, here's some of the maritime band and 80M using the HF/VHF AMP right now
Best Wishes
Paul



On Sun, 5 Jan 2020 at 05:15, paul newland <newland.newland@...> wrote:
Hi Brent
Really "chuffed" with results using my newly acquired HF/VHF head unit - first impressions (VLF/HF AMP temporarily-retired to indoor loop).
My location is SW UK; may I ask where you are - country or approximately whereabouts?
Best Wishes
Paul



On Sat, 4 Jan 2020 at 21:01, Brent Mcl <blauchlin@...> wrote:
CCW on the airspy 20 meters looks same as wellbrock on 20 meters



Re: My newest CCW Loop

Brent Mcl
 
Edited

My  perseus  on the CCW loop the wellbrock is on SDRIQ  theirs not much differences between the loop

ccw                                              wellbrook                           ccw                                             wellbrook


Re: My newest CCW Loop

Paul Newland
 

Thanks Brent - it was actually very quiet over here when I did the comparison on 20M and I'll be having another look, but overall I must say that the performance of the HF/VHF AMP is impressive.
I also have one of the original batch of VLF/HF versions which was quite interesting (now temporarily retired to indoor use}.
You live in a beautiful area. The ferry trip from Vancouver to Victoria in fine weather is one not to be forgotten!
Best Wishes
Paul



On Sun, 5 Jan 2020 at 13:37, Brent Mcl <blauchlin@...> wrote:
My QTH is  Vancouver Island BC ..I hope to get the CCW on a rotor today and i will post some more pics using the same software


Re: My newest CCW Loop

Brent Mcl
 

My QTH is  Vancouver Island BC ..I hope to get the CCW on a rotor today and i will post some more pics using the same software


Re: off topic

JOHN.TEMPLETON3@...
 

Thanks for updates Chris I look forward to it coming.
Regards
John


Re: digital messenger V 1.7

Chris Moulding
 

We have recently stopped supporting Digital Messenger and APRS Messenger.

I know that there is a problem with the program with sound card issues when used with Windows 10.

Unfortunately the programming software used to write Digital Messenger and APRS Messenger will not run in Windows 10 so it is not possible to find out and test what the problem is.

I wrote it while I was a member of RAYNET but they never used the program. It was widely used by radio amateurs in South America monitoring local volcanic eruptions.

Regards,

Chris


digital messenger V 1.7

pat obrien <2WR796@...>
 

I found digital messenger and using it on 30 meters, it has a beacon, a different type of message formal/informal but works great for me, I think it was written for RAYNET but works good on HF,. so 30 meters is active again...10147.60
POB/K8LEN


Re: off topic

Chris Moulding
 

John,

With the Christmas / New year holidays we have had problems with some of our suppliers and we have not been able to get a machined part for the Active Vertical Antenna you ordered.

We should get a delivery of them this coming week so we will be able to ship your antenna later in the week.

Thank you for your patience.

Regards,

Chris


Re: off topic

JOHN.TEMPLETON3@...
 

Chris any word of my order of Hf active antenna and power supply.
Your acknowledgment email of the 16th December stated you planned to get them out that week, nothing arrived yet.
Regards
John


Re: My newest CCW Loop

David Cutter
 

Hi Brent

These look very instructive.  Can you arrange for them both to have the same left hand scale, best would be dBm?

 

73 and Happy New Year

David G3UNA

 

From: CrossCountryWireless@groups.io [mailto:CrossCountryWireless@groups.io] On Behalf Of Brent Mcl
Sent: 04 January 2020 21:59
To: CrossCountryWireless@groups.io
Subject: Re: [CrossCountryWireless] My newest CCW Loop

 

CCW on the airspy 20 meters looks same as wellbrock on 20 meters


Re: My newest CCW Loop

Paul Gulliver
 

Hi Brent,

Just looking at the screen shots, on the 7MHz comparison there seems to be a lot more background noise on the ccw amp compared to the Wellbrook, (S6 compared to S2 on the Wellbrook) was this interference or was the ccw amp producing more noise?

With the 14MHz test is difficult to make a comparison as you are using 2 different pieces of software so I'm not sure if the noise level is the same or not.

Cheers,

Paul


On 05/01/2020 at 06:23, Paul Newland <newland.newland@...> wrote:
Just for interest, here's some of the maritime band and 80M using the HF/VHF AMP right now
Best Wishes
Paul



On Sun, 5 Jan 2020 at 05:15, paul newland <newland.newland@...> wrote:
Hi Brent
Really "chuffed" with results using my newly acquired HF/VHF head unit - first impressions (VLF/HF AMP temporarily-retired to indoor loop).
My location is SW UK; may I ask where you are - country or approximately whereabouts?
Best Wishes
Paul



On Sat, 4 Jan 2020 at 21:01, Brent Mcl <blauchlin@...> wrote:
CCW on the airspy 20 meters looks same as wellbrock on 20 meters



Re: My newest CCW Loop

Paul Newland
 

Just for interest, here's some of the maritime band and 80M using the HF/VHF AMP right now
Best Wishes
Paul



On Sun, 5 Jan 2020 at 05:15, paul newland <newland.newland@...> wrote:
Hi Brent
Really "chuffed" with results using my newly acquired HF/VHF head unit - first impressions (VLF/HF AMP temporarily-retired to indoor loop).
My location is SW UK; may I ask where you are - country or approximately whereabouts?
Best Wishes
Paul



On Sat, 4 Jan 2020 at 21:01, Brent Mcl <blauchlin@...> wrote:
CCW on the airspy 20 meters looks same as wellbrock on 20 meters

1121 - 1140 of 7838