Remember back when some said my Open Stub J-pole (OSJ) design
Would not work very well.
Just take a look at 25 reviews at
A HREF="http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/1613"eHam.net Reviews - OSJ Model
J146/440/A
or
http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/1613

See if you can find the ONE review that did not give it a
5 out of 5 rating.

Changing the way J-Poles are made, "Simply the Best"

73 Al Lowe N0IMW
ArrowAntenna.com

I have built 5 of these antennas for myself, family and friends based on
your webite description and all of them work wonderful. One of my club
Members even ran it thru ez nec and it looked great there too.
Thanks.
John, VE2JDR

"Arrow146" wrote in message
...
Remember back when some said my Open Stub J-pole (OSJ) design
Would not work very well.
Just take a look at 25 reviews at
A HREF="http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/1613"eHam.net Reviews - OSJ
Model
J146/440/A
or
http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/1613

See if you can find the ONE review that did not give it a
5 out of 5 rating.

Changing the way J-Poles are made, "Simply the Best"

73 Al Lowe N0IMW
ArrowAntenna.com

Hello,

It's always funny to see people saying, "best I have ever used" etc, what
must they have used before!
It's not really a new design is it, maybe just similar to what is known as a
"nest of dipoles" that scanner enthusiasts have. They use different
radiating elements in parallel.

"Arrow146" wrote in message
...
Remember back when some said my Open Stub J-pole (OSJ) design
Would not work very well.
Just take a look at 25 reviews at
A HREF="http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/1613"eHam.net Reviews - OSJ
Model
J146/440/A
or
http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/1613

See if you can find the ONE review that did not give it a
5 out of 5 rating.

Changing the way J-Poles are made, "Simply the Best"

73 Al Lowe N0IMW
ArrowAntenna.com


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.703 / Virus Database: 459 - Release Date: 10/06/2004

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 22:25:36 +0100, "jason" wrote:
maybe just similar to what is known as a
"nest of dipoles" that scanner enthusiasts have. They use different
radiating elements in parallel.

Hi Jason,

Not that at all, otherwise all of the elements would be driven, and
simple observation negates that. I've reported a similar design to
this group years ago that uses the SO-239 bulkhead connector wired up
in similar fashion: One wire extending directly from the center pin
solder tail, and another wire, parallel, soldered to any of the four
holes normally used for mounting. No need whatever for the usual
JPole tuning cap.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

In article ,
Richard Clark wrote:

maybe just similar to what is known as a
"nest of dipoles" that scanner enthusiasts have. They use different
radiating elements in parallel.

Hi Jason,

Not that at all, otherwise all of the elements would be driven, and
simple observation negates that. I've reported a similar design to
this group years ago that uses the SO-239 bulkhead connector wired up
in similar fashion: One wire extending directly from the center pin
solder tail, and another wire, parallel, soldered to any of the four
holes normally used for mounting. No need whatever for the usual
JPole tuning cap.

There's an analysis of a similar design on Cebik's web site - his
"non-standard J-pole" is a bottom-fed, non-shorted design with a
shorter-than-usual radiating section and a longer-than-usual matching
leg.

http://www.cebik.com/jp1.html

It looks to me as if the Arrow design has similar element lengths to
the one which Cebik models. The Arrow trick of using one element as
the matching leg for 2-meter and as the radiator for 440 is a slick
one.

Everyone I've spoken with who has used an Arrow 146/440 J-pole has
been very happy with it.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Hosting the 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!

ANYTHING will work!

The question arises how WELL will it work?

Without quantification, statements are meaningless.

Specially when the weakest parameters are not mentioned in specifications
and are not discussed amongst the biassed-in-favour so-called judges.

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 22:22:22 -0000, (Dave Platt)
wrote:

Hi Jason,

Not that at all, otherwise all of the elements would be driven, and
simple observation negates that. I've reported a similar design to
this group years ago that uses the SO-239 bulkhead connector wired up
in similar fashion: One wire extending directly from the center pin
solder tail, and another wire, parallel, soldered to any of the four
holes normally used for mounting. No need whatever for the usual
JPole tuning cap.

There's an analysis of a similar design on Cebik's web site - his
"non-standard J-pole" is a bottom-fed, non-shorted design with a
shorter-than-usual radiating section and a longer-than-usual matching
leg.

http://www.cebik.com/jp1.html


Hi Jason, Dave,

A repeat of a subset of data offered here 5 and 7 years ago from data
measured at the bench 12 years ago:

.... built up from 0.085" diameter bronze tubing. In each case, the
center connection is brought out 13 inches.... with one vertical
element that paralleled the main element with a constant separation of
0.5 inch.

The variation of the second rod is called "Match Length" in the chart

Radiator Match Fo SWR
Length Length MHz 50 Ohm

13.0 6.0 485 2.8
13.0 5.75 548 2.3
13.0 5.5 556 1.8
13.0 5.25 576 1.8 (545-630 3:1)
13.0 5.0 624.5 1.48 (575-640 2:1)
13.0 4.75 638 1.08 (640-660 2:1)

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

can you build a copper pipe beam ant

wrote:
I have two. They do work and their performance is no different than
and other end fed halfwave, as expected and as modeled.

Al gave me one for testing many years ago. Using my Palomar FS1,
it tested out better than a 1/4WL and equal to a vertical dipole.
I also modeled it using EZNEC with the same results. It is still
going strong although, after a decade, the plastic end caps have
cracked in the AZ and TX sun. Honestly, that's the only criticism
I can think of. Those end caps are of only cosmetic value.
--
73,



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Subject: To those that said it would not work
From:
Date: 17, Thursday June, 2004 8:22 PM
Message-id:
Hi Al,

I have two. They do work and their performance is no different than
and other end fed halfwave, as expected and as modeled. Also side by
side with monoband plumber specials(1/2 cu pipe designs) it is a
match, as in no difference. One I use for semiportable ops as it's
dual band and easy to mount up on a portable tripod and 15ft of
masting.

Allison KB1gmx

On 17 Jun 2004 16:43:05 GMT, (Arrow146) wrote:
As long a the copper pipe one is made correctly and has a choke
to cut down on common mode currents. And if the connections are
good, etc. And you don't mind the narrow band width.

Your right, a 1/2 wave is a 1/2 is a 1/2 wave. All have 0 dBd.

73 Al Lowe N0IMW
ArrowAntenna.com