I placed an internet order for a RotorCard DXA from Idiom Press on August 17, 2010 and promptly received a confirmation of my order via email.  I have tried about once per week to contact Idiom Press by phone and email to obtain the status of my order, but get no response.  I did not post in the thread below regarding Idiom Press because I do not want to be involved in the flames; I am simply wondering if I will ever receive my order or if I need to purchase an alternate product.  The slow start/stop feature and the inexpensive, but very functional, addition of computer control with the DXA card was the reason I decided on a Yaesu G-2800 DXA as opposed to another rotator.

Does anyone know if Idiom Press is shipping DXA cards?

Edited to say...This is part of an internet remote station, making computer control of the rotator more vital to the operation of the station.  Otherwise, I would not necessarily be in as big of a hurry to add the functionality.

Any experience with Remoterig hardware/software?

I have not, but thanks for the idea!

Anyone make a pointed metal cap for a 2" OD mast?

For those with internet remote stations, are you implementing some type of PTT timeout for when you lose internet connectivity while the station is transmitting?

I will be putting my new T-10 LPDA together on Thursday of this week.  I have two 8 ounce bottles of Contax - Oxide Inhibiting Compound, Thomas & Betts catalog number CTB8, left over from about 10 years ago during a previous tower/ground project.  Any experience with this product?  I want to use this or whatever is currently recommended for all the aluminum to aluminum contact between boom inserts, boom to elements, etc.

The Tennadyne assembly instructions recommend a mixture of WD-40 and lock graphite.

Terry, your email did not make it to my in box. Can you resend it? Thanks.
[/quote]

I just resent you a personal message.  I did not get your personal message either.  Let me know if you don't get my personal message and we will do this another way...

I purchased the version of EZNEC with 500 segments and I am already addicted to the software!

I just sent you a personal message with my email address.

Thanks in advance,

Terry

Thank you very much for running this for me!  This will give me something to compare to in my initial modeling with unfamiliar software.

I have noticed that EZNEC seems to be very popular and I have downloaded the free version to play with.  I played with a DOS version of miniNEC over 20 years ago.  I was thinking that 20 segments seemed very limited.  I was always assuming that I would probably purchase a workable copy, just wanted to make sure which one to buy.

I am still scratching out a living and have limited time to play with this.  I was thinking that I could model the antennas at my given height with average soil conductivity and not bother with modeling the tower, the other metallic guy wires beyond the non-metallic ones, and the feedline.  Would this not probably get me close enough to have a reasonable assurance of resonance and performance when mounted on the tower?

I was referring to overall performance related to pattern, bandwidth, etc.  I want to design the antennas so that the resonance points fall within my bands of interest.  Since this is an internet remote station, it would be great if an antenna tuner was not required beyond possibly the internal tuner in the Kenwood TS-480SAT.  As long as a reasonable VSWR was obtained to keep the rig happy, I would also like to not use a tuner to reduce losses in the system.

I considered using 80 and 160 meter dipoles tied to the same feed with an SGC-235 automatic tuner at the feedpoint to allow full band operation on 80 and 160 and operation on 30 and 60 as odd multiples of 80 and 160.  This setup should result in minimum loss in the tuner.

It would be difficult for me to tie off a full size 160 meter dipole running in the NW/SE direction, but two antennas at right angles to each other would be neat since I could switch antennas to fill in the nulls of the patterns.  That would be the next best thing to being able to rotate that antennas.

Exactly why I want to do the analysis myself.


I feel for the manufacturers that are trying to market antennas such as the OCF in an attempt to fit all the mounting situations of their customers.  Don't you think that the reason most yagis perform so much better than wire antennas is not that they have more gain, but that they are usually mounted up high and in the clear?


Could not agree more.


I might want to send you one of my designs to check.  I would like to have that warm and fuzzy feeling that I am doing things correctly.

W8JI states in the article: "Note: This feedpoint offset gives up 30 meters. This is the primary reason I avoided the 1/3-2/3 feedpoint position and used the 80% feedpoint position."

His design criteria was at least partially based on including as many bands as possible.  I am hoping to design a better performing antenna on my bands of interest (80/160 and 30/60) since I am only trying to optimize on two bands, not several.

Please let me state that I am not arguing with you, I am actually asking questions through my replies.  I have read several of your articles and have a lot of respect for your work!

Why would it not work to place a choke balun immediately after the voltage transformation balun?

The following link shows an overhead view of the tower location with the yellow lines representing the guy wires and the red lines representing the best directions for tying off wire antennas to trees:

http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss252/N1048D/Amateur%20Radio/Shop.jpg

The longer span for tie off points, because of relatively flat slopes and not requiring any tree trimming, is the NE/SW axis which would put that antenna broadside to the NW/SE.  But, since the 80/160 meter antenna would be much less than one half wavelength above the ground, it would be relatively omnidirectional and it would not have good low angle radiation for DX anyway.  The ground elevation slopes off steeply in the NW/SE direction and there are numerous trees and tree limbs to deal with making the NW/SE direction more suited for the shorter 30/60 antenna and probably more desirable for DX being broadside to the NE/SW.

Given the details just described, an OCF seems to be the ideal antenna for my situation.  The OCF works well on even harmonics with 80/160 being ideal candidates and I would think 30/60 being close enough.  The transformation through a 6:1 balun should make the antenna more broadbanded than a center fed dipole.  Compared to multiple dipoles tied to the same feed, the OCF only requires one tie off point at each end and hopefully would not require tuning when mounted on the tower.

I am basing my information on what I read on the internet since I have not ever actually operated an OCF.  If I am missing facts that adversly effect the real world operation of the OCF, please advise.

One detail is that the guy wires above and below the level of the apex of these antennas will be non-conducting.  Another detail is that this is an internet remote station and I want to automate the operation as much as possible.