I think that one thing that people overlook about Tom Rauch is that he has an extraordinary ability --and motivation-- to communicate his vast knowledge and thoughts to others.

I have know Tom for many years, though we haven't really communicated much in a long time. I will say one thing: radio and electronics simply consumes him. I think that's all he mainly thinks about. His wife told my wife that many years ago, and that has certainly been my observation. (And I'm glad for that. :-) That's why he knows so much.

And he tests and measures about everything. How many of us do that?

It's one thing to have a broad range of technical expertise. It's another thing to be able to share it, to get your point across in a clear manner that draws us in, makes perfect sense, and makes us sit up in our chairs and take notice, open our eyes wide, and say "WOW!". Probably, there are a few others like Tom, but we just don't know about them for one reason or another.

Another person I admire for his technical knowledge is Owen Duffy, VK1OD (vk1od.net). He has an amazing repertoire of knowledge in a number of fields, not just radio/electronics. I am in awe of both Owen and Tom. Too bad Owen left the forums because of a few unkind things people said to him.

But there are other really sharp people on the forums. And when I see a post from them, I know that it is accurate.

I just wish I had their energy.

This nonsense about Hexbeams and quads performing well at low heights is truly nonsense. This bit of falsehood has become a ham urban myth legend.
Hams just have to accept  the reasons why they install their antennas low. If they dont want to go through the trouble and expense of putting  them up higher, they should just say so, rather repeating old wives tales to make themselves feel better.

If this fact was true,  these  so called low height antennas would have proven themselves on 75 meters or 160 meters working DX. I have never heard a big  signal from anyone using a low beam  or quad antenna on 75 meters.

Maybe one day we will be able to control the takeoff angle electronically, that day is a long way off!

Height=signal might.

KA7NIQ, when you said "grandpa is in business" you described my setup exactly...including the height and 600 watt amp!

For low angles, the higher the better, agreed.

I had mine on a push-up pole at my last QTH, and decided it was easier and cheaper to just use "armstrong" method and turn it by hand.  A bit inconvenient, but it worked. 

Currently I have it suspended at 45 feet between two trees, with poly line to rotate it as needed.  Not a rotator, but it's simple and it does work.

KA7NIQ, I agree...partially.  From the East Coast, if his timing was right and he was running high power, maybe he WAS doing it right.  He might have been better off if he simply called CQ DX instead while beaming Asia.  If he's expecting somebody other than JA or UA0 to come back to him, it might be slim pickings at this time.  Hoping for BY or HS or XV to respond to his call is *very* optimistic and not as realistic as 5 elements at 70 feet.  Certainly he won't be making his own pileups with the hex at that height.

However, I have done similar things with my Hex, but it was in the summer and I was beaming at JA at my sunset.  I called CQ DX from East Coast and got a few JA stations to come back to me.  But I timed it right and knew I had a good chance at that time.  And I was using an amp.  And I knew there were other JA stations around.

Honestly, I have found better luck with the hex when I did Search and Pounce for DX.  It just seems more realistic and I get really good results.

ZENKI, I like your post very much.  However, with all due respect, I disagree with the assertion that the hex is 1-2 dB within the Optibeam.  The hex is basically a 2 element wire yagi.  It is not even in the same category as a four or five element, optimally spaced yagi.  Some compromises for multi-band yagis are made, but a single band 4 or 5 element yagi on any band will wreck a hex beam (except in a few very rare circumstances for specific angles where the yagi may have a null).  No contest. 

For everyday DX use, why spend $5K on an Optibeam when you could have a Hex.  But for rare DX, there is no subsitute for LOTS OF METAL WAY UP IN THE SKY.

At this time, the FCC is not promoting Advanced class licensees to Extras, and has announced no plans to do so in the future.

The only sense in which the FCC "did away" with the Advanced class license is that they're not issuing any more of them.  Any existing Advanced licenses can be renewed indefinitely.

You will be doing everyone a favor producing even cheaper hexbeams.

Hexbeam owners seem to be like a swarm of bees on the air now. So many stations using them and they certainly seem to work well.

It would be nice if every station who owns a  G5RV, Windom/OCF, vertical or bits of wire all buy a hexbeam. The success of these antennas speak for themselves.

I also notice that stations with hexbeams get on the air more and seem to be working the bands calling CQ like real hams, and because they have an effective antenna they are working the world.

If you cant afford a Optibeam or steppir  antenna get a hexbeam, they so close in performance that it does not matter. Nobody can measure or see 1 or 2 db difference between the Hexbeam and bigger antennas.

The point is that if you own  a hexbeam you will have a better signal than most other stations that use bits of wire and verticals.

I think the Hexbeam  gets my vote for the antenna of the decade  award.  The hexbeam is becoming the G5RV of beams. The big difference is that the hexbeams puts out  a signal that leaves the G5RV sounding like a dummy load.

Someone should pass a law that if you a ham and  you dont have a beam up already, it should be law that you go out and put up a hexbeam or your license will be cancelled! Even if its only on a 30ft pole.

It's basically a half wave wire (just like a dipole) with the ends bent around so
maximum current is in the continuous vertical section.  It is fed off-center
(at the bottom) where the impedance is 50 ohms (with proper adjustment of
the dimensions.)

It might not look like a conventional OCFD, but if you moved the feedpoint up
to the center of the continuous vertical section, you'd have trouble explaining
why it isn't a vertical dipole with bent ends.

But there's no reason even to have radials, radials are usually on or in the ground and therefore are lossy, ie. part of the ground.  Get rid of the radials and have an effective antenna with a real 50Ω input.  If you don't want to believe me, go for it.  I have low angle radiation, no ground issues and a multi-band antenna.  And I don't string wires all over the ground, just in the air.  All I do is isolate the antenna from the coax and ground with a ferrite current choke and all the problems go away.  It's really kind of like an off center fed dipole that's been choked off the ground.

All I can say is try it.  It's cheap, easy and only requires one support and some PVC for a spreader.  But there are Luddites all over the place, including me, but I don't put up with inefficient low radiation resistance verticals.   There's no need.  Things really do progress as time goes on.

Dave
N3DT

Please give me the call sign of these engineers , individual you spoke with . I will contact them my self. But people will say any thing to make a sale !

A friend of mine had a TH6DX up at 50 feet plus a A3 we ran many on the air test. He running a KW . Me using 100 watts, He could NEVER beat my Quad on receive or transmit . He took them down and put a 3 el Steppir up and DXing changed to the better for him.

Sorry They said - HE Said - They Said - You Say !

Read "Array of Light "

Besides that traps are subject to water and spiders getting in them.

 Another friend of mine had hy-gain and crushcraft trapped beams and gave up on them and switched to Force 12, never to go back to trapped beam. Because of moisture and spiders in the traps.

Traps are a thing of the pass IMHO

End

73 JIM

Hi Chris ,

I would like to suggest to you and every one reading this thread. go and purchase "Array of Light" Third Edition , Straight talk about antennas and related subjects By Tom Schiller, N6BT

This book was written by former owner of Force 12 as most know .

When you read and study the material in this book  you  should be soon convinced that trapped antenna are NOT superior to trap less beams.

My other point to readers here is this . What do contest stations use for beams ? If trapped beams were so good . Every contest stations would use them instead of mono band beams and mono band  beam stacks. Just think , they could have just one tower and save a lot of money!

On the new rage of of dxing , I will point out go and look at  DX Leaderboards , What beams and antennas are the top leaders using at their stations ?

 Gain is Gain bottom line . No one here will convince me that a wide spaced optimized tri band  yagi beam as my C-31XR with 14.5 dbi gain will be beat out by some little old  trapped beams, Steppir beams , or Quads for that matter. I have tested many many antenna. Talked to many contest station owners as well as professional installer. Have done many on the air test against Quads , trapped beams , motorized beams. And owned some.

Chris , Why do you think I own a Force 12 C-31XR ?

Gain is Gain and trapless beam  is less worry and less lots of troubles.

Buy what you can afford and use what is best for your location . But don't believe a trapped beam is better than a Force 12 !

73 JIM