On Wed, 17 May 2006 23:48:26 -0400, "Yuri Blanarovich"
wrote:



Yea, it was and believe still is MAXCOM magik flat antenna :-)
You can fool some people.....

Yuri

It looks like he is now selling it as an antenna tuner.

Not accounting for his marketing technique, his idea wasn't all bad.
I found a 100 ohm, 300 watt resistor when I worked for George at
Disc-Cap electronics, a surplus sales company. It was heavy, but I
wired it across the two legs of an 80 meter dipole and got less than
1.5:1 anywhere I tuned the transmitter. It was lossy compared to a
resonant antenna, but it worked ok. I would love to have one again.
In an emergency, you can't get the wrong length of antenna wire, even
no wire gave a good match and would probably radiate 100 watts at
least as well as some QRP stations . Of course one needs to HEAR the
station they are talking with sometimes....

I would love to compare the results of using that with the t2fd.

--
73 for now
Buck
N4PGW

Felix wrote:


Roy Lewallen Wrote:
Buck wrote:
. . .
If it performs as well as you claim it does, or if it is similar to
the performance of an EH per size,(for example, hypothetically
speaking, a 3 foot antenna performs as well as a 1/2 wave vertical
20
meter antenna), and if the cost and skill level required for building
the antenna is suitable to me, I might be interested in purchasing
the
plans for your antenna.
. . .

You must mean, "If it performs as well as the EH antenna claims to
perform." If it can do that, it's miraculous indeed. It's no trick to
make an antenna perform as well as an EH -- a 3 foot high (fat)
vertical
performs as well as a 3 foot high EH.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

HERE A FEW RESULTS:

QRV with RoomCap antenna on 80m

On May 15th, 2006 I was QRV on 80 m during 1 1/2 hour.
Tcvr: TS-50 (100 W PEP), QRG = 3.770 - 3.787 Mhz
Antenna: RoomCap with 1.66m radiator length
installed on my car. SWR = 1.0
QTH: Peripheral part of city of Basel.

Conditions: The band was weak with a lot of QRN.

Here follows the contacts and the
received signal reports:

20:10 DJ6YF, 59+10, Hans, Bielefeld
20:10 DL3EAI, 59, Reino, Mittetal (nr border to PA)
20:14 DJ6LGB, 58, Peter, Lüneburg
20:17 G4KHM, 57, John, nr. Brighton
20:23 DL1JGG, 58, Renald,Plauen
20:30 DC4HW, 59 Walter, Lauenburg nr Lueneburg
20:33 DG6DAG, 59+10, Otto, Nord-Hessen nr Kassel
20:40 YO4RDW, 57, Romeo, Odfbesei, Rumaenien
20:50 F4AWH, 59, Jean-Luc, nr Besancon
20:55 2E0BOT, 59, John, Stratford UK
21:10 DF9YK, 59, Wolfgang, Mainz
21:11 SP8TDV, 57, Adam, Lublin, Poland
21:13 HB9AQA, 59+10 - +20, Ferdi, nr Lenzburg
21:22 9A4M, 59, Mate, Sisah, Croatia
21:28 G1RVP, 57, Pete, Dereham
21:30 DJ6MM, 59+10, Paul, Eifel
21:38 DK5WN, 59, Thomas nr Erfurt
21:39 SP1DTE 58, Luk Koloberg, Poland
21:40 HB9XJ, 59+10, Hans, Zuerich
21:43 QRT


With best 73s

Felix HB9ABX




Well well...

Whatever one believes and/or thinks about the EH-Antenna, Ted Hart, the
creator and the patent holder, is honest enough to release the full design
information to the ham community - to hate or to love.

The method of selling sealed envelopes is - at the best regrettable and at
worst, something really different.

As the EH-Antenna is targeted to the commercial world - this antenna is an
obvious way of making money out of the non-commercial hams.

I think the judgement are coming down hard on you Felix and I have to agree
on this judgement. Again, nothing personal but maybe a very much middle
European way of selling. As the Ham world is mainly Anglo-Saxon - it just
doesn't work! I suggest you do as the EH-Antenna Inc, release the full info
for homebrewers and sell a ready made version to the turn-key amateurs
instead!


Cheers

Dan / M0DFI

I think the judgement are coming down hard on you Felix and I have to agree
on this judgement. Again, nothing personal but maybe a very much middle
European way of selling. As the Ham world is mainly Anglo-Saxon - it just
doesn't work! I suggest you do as the EH-Antenna Inc, release the full info
for homebrewers and sell a ready made version to the turn-key amateurs
instead!


One of the advantages of selling the ready made version is to ward off
those who don't follow construction details carefully and unfairly
generate negative reports about the antenna. From what I gather, it
is very inexpensive to build which lends to room for a large enough
markup to gain some profit.




--
73 for now
Buck
N4PGW

Felix:

You have an agreement buyers must abide by. Would you please post it
here so we can all read it before paying?

Buck
--
73 for now
Buck
N4PGW

20:10 DJ6YF, 59+10, Hans, Bielefeld
20:10 DL3EAI, 59, Reino, Mittetal (nr border to PA)
20:14 DJ6LGB, 58, Peter, Lüneburg
20:17 G4KHM, 57, John, nr. Brighton
20:23 DL1JGG, 58, Renald,Plauen
20:30 DC4HW, 59 Walter, Lauenburg nr Lueneburg
20:33 DG6DAG, 59+10, Otto, Nord-Hessen nr Kassel
20:40 YO4RDW, 57, Romeo, Odfbesei, Rumaenien
20:50 F4AWH, 59, Jean-Luc, nr Besancon
20:55 2E0BOT, 59, John, Stratford UK
21:10 DF9YK, 59, Wolfgang, Mainz
21:11 SP8TDV, 57, Adam, Lublin, Poland
21:13 HB9AQA, 59+10 - +20, Ferdi, nr Lenzburg
21:22 9A4M, 59, Mate, Sisah, Croatia
21:28 G1RVP, 57, Pete, Dereham
21:30 DJ6MM, 59+10, Paul, Eifel
21:38 DK5WN, 59, Thomas nr Erfurt
21:39 SP1DTE 58, Luk Koloberg, Poland
21:40 HB9XJ, 59+10, Hans, Zuerich
21:43 QRT
=--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The reports are pretty lackluster I'd say... A 1/2 dipole would have
trounced that thing... It might be small, but so is the performance
judging from your reports. If I was working regional distances like
that and got 57-58 reports, I'd be wondering who cut my antenna
down.. :/
MK

On 29 May 2006 06:21:41 -0700, "George" wrote:

How about a design that is small in size, loads the feedline, lights up
the shack, and fries my pacemaker? RF has got to go somewhere! It is a
good bet that if the military and commercial users have not or do not
accept the super design, then I think I will save my $ for the more
accepted, tried and true antenna.
New ideas need to be consistant with the accepted laws of physics
unless what is being proposed is so radical that it breaks new ground.
At that point it is the job of the inventor to lay out the theory and
application for peer review. Otherwise, we spend a lot of time shooting
the bull.

Yes but after we shoot the bull the barbecue is so much fun! :}


wrote:
20:10 DJ6YF, 59+10, Hans, Bielefeld
20:10 DL3EAI, 59, Reino, Mittetal (nr border to PA)
20:14 DJ6LGB, 58, Peter, Lüneburg
20:17 G4KHM, 57, John, nr. Brighton
20:23 DL1JGG, 58, Renald,Plauen
20:30 DC4HW, 59 Walter, Lauenburg nr Lueneburg
20:33 DG6DAG, 59+10, Otto, Nord-Hessen nr Kassel
20:40 YO4RDW, 57, Romeo, Odfbesei, Rumaenien
20:50 F4AWH, 59, Jean-Luc, nr Besancon
20:55 2E0BOT, 59, John, Stratford UK
21:10 DF9YK, 59, Wolfgang, Mainz
21:11 SP8TDV, 57, Adam, Lublin, Poland
21:13 HB9AQA, 59+10 - +20, Ferdi, nr Lenzburg
21:22 9A4M, 59, Mate, Sisah, Croatia
21:28 G1RVP, 57, Pete, Dereham
21:30 DJ6MM, 59+10, Paul, Eifel
21:38 DK5WN, 59, Thomas nr Erfurt
21:39 SP1DTE 58, Luk Koloberg, Poland
21:40 HB9XJ, 59+10, Hans, Zuerich
21:43 QRT
=--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The reports are pretty lackluster I'd say... A 1/2 dipole would have
trounced that thing... It might be small, but so is the performance
judging from your reports. If I was working regional distances like
that and got 57-58 reports, I'd be wondering who cut my antenna
down.. :/
MK



I've learned that I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy it! (The hell with my X-wife!)

Remove the x for e-mail reply
www.outdoorfrontiers.com
www.SecretWeaponLures.com
A proud charter member of "PETAF", People for Eating Tasty Animals and Fish!!!

George wrote:

- New ideas need to be consistant with the accepted laws of physics
- unless what is being proposed is so radical that it breaks new ground.
- At that point it is the job of the inventor to lay out the theory and
- application for peer review. Otherwise, we spend a lot of time shooting
- the bull.

Theory is as good, as it corresponds with the real world.
If your theory does not correspond to the real world results
you have to revise it.

But maybe it is just your understanding of the full theory.

The design is available for anybody who wants to check it.
Contact me

with best regards

Felix HB9ABX

The design is available for anybody who wants to check it.
Contact me

Felix HB9ABX
=====================================

How much money do you want up front?

NEW: RoomCap 160 m Antenna
4th August 2006

I am glad to announce, that the 160 m version is ready, and has been tested successfully.
This constitutes a new milestone in antenna technology!

The radiator measures only 2% of the wavelength and works equally well as a 36 m longwire.
The length of the radiator is 320 cm, and the test antenna was installed on my car.
Within a few seconds the SWR is set to 1.0 in the full band from 1.8 to 2.0 MHz, simply by
pressing a botton.

The last 4 nights I could test and compare this new antenne, and it was a real pleasure.
However, one must be aware that the topband 160 m is a night band. Band opening is about
at 22h, something for night fans.

The comparison was against a 36 m longwire, perfectly matched, 9 m above ground in free
environment. Both station were operating with the same power, at the same location (within 300 m).
(Thank you Sergio, HB9BXS for your preseverance!)

The remote stations gave the following reports, always after a couple of short changeovers
between our 2 stations:

DJ5MX (Böblingen near Stuttgart) QRB = 170 km
- Roomcap is 1 S-point stronger

DJ1HS (Lauterhofen nr. Nuernberg) QRB = 360 km
- both stations have the same signal strength

DJ8YP (Sigmaringen) QRB = 140 km
- Roomcap about 3 db weaker

DD1IW (nr. Muenchen) QRB = 315 km
- both stations are about equal

G3IMX (Isle of Wight) QRB = 715 km
- Roomcap is 6 to 10 db stronger

G0RRM (Lichfield) QRB = 920 km
- Roomcap 1/2 S-point weaker

G3URM (Staffordshire) QRB = 940 km
- Roomcap about 1 S-point stronger

+ many other stations, confirming the same result.

The update for the owners of the construction guide is ready in about 10 days.

73s

Felix HB9ABX.

Confirmation of RoomCap results:

Dear OMs,

My published results have been confirmed by
several builders of the RoomCap antenna.

Here follows the mail I (Felix HB9ABX) received from Belgium:

On Sonday, I've done the first test with the roomcap
antenna on 14 MC. I've did the test with a
- roomcap antenna, 80 cm above the ground.
- Microvert 3 m above the ground.

The results with the two antenna's:
-the roomcap antenna = +1,5 S punt -- +3 S punt better.
This result is dependant of different incoming signals.
I do have to notice that the roomcap antenna receives
more back ground noise.
I'll keep you posted on further test-results.

Best 73
on6wb albert