T-bone wrote:
Might be true - But its on a 15 ft mast above the roof.
Putting it indoors would be sacrificing considerable height.
I got 10 years + and still counting, so I think the extra 20 ft height is
well worth it.

If you live - as I do - in an area where ice storms, hurricanes, and strong
windstorms are all common, attic-locating an antenna can even make for much
more choice in what you make the antenna out of if you are making a
do-it-yourself one. (A commercial broadcast tower a half-mile away blew down
during a major storm several years ago.)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
BDissident news - plus immigration, gun rights, weather, Internet Gun Show
IA HREF="http://www.alamanceind.com"ALAMANCE INDEPENDENT:
official newspaper of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy/A/b/i

(GLC1173) wrote in
:

T-bone wrote:
Might be true - But its on a 15 ft mast above the roof.
Putting it indoors would be sacrificing considerable height.
I got 10 years + and still counting, so I think the extra 20 ft height
is well worth it.

If you live - as I do - in an area where ice storms, hurricanes, and
strong
windstorms are all common, attic-locating an antenna can even make for
much more choice in what you make the antenna out of if you are making a
do-it-yourself one. (A commercial broadcast tower a half-mile away blew
down during a major storm several years ago.)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Valid points.
No matter how you look at it, giving up 20 ft is quite a sacfice for a
monitor.
Ice/wind storms in my location - No hurricanes.

Yes, I admit ripping off the from someone ( I
couldn't tell you who) probably
on this group though. I've been lurking around hear for about 10 years under
various email addresses (always as myself though)
I decided to go undercover, so to speak, just to avoid spam. How many
times have I read, just remove the "no spam"
from the address to respond, so I stole somebodies (Arnold?s) original
idea.

I cannot to address the question regarding the attached article. I
re-skimmed yesterday before posting and vaguely
recall that the author stated reception was decent below the designed lower
frequency. believe he mentions
that the design could be modified to extend the range down.


Bruce



"Never anonymous Bud" wrote in message
...
Trying to steal the thunder from Arnold, "B L R"
on Sun, 16 Jan 2005 17:32:22 GMT spoke:


I'd LOVE to know why the author calls it VHF/UHF,
when it's low-end is 700mhz??






--

The truth is out there,

but it's not interesting enough for most people.

Don't do it. Discones are broadbanded with almost no gain on any
frequencies. Buy a Scantenna from Grove Enterprises and use a Radio
Shack vhf/fm/uhf tv mast mount preamp.

wrote:

Does anyone know if there are plans for a discone scanner antenna on
the web to build?

Have a look at dxzone antenna section

http://www.dxzone.com