[Elecraft] K3 not recieving

w5ov at w5ov.com w5ov at w5ov.com
Wed Mar 9 17:07:03 EST 2011 

Joe,

My 43' antenna works very well on 160 and 80 as I have reported. In fact,
it works so well that those DX stations that I work with it are amazed -
quite frankly so am I.

Sorry, but your opinion is just that.

73,

Bob W5OV



>
>  > The 43' length is a convenient non-resonant length - nothing else.
>
> No, 43' is 5/8 wave on 20 meters (984/14.3*0.625 == 43).  That is
> the point (well, 0.64 wave if you want to be precise) that the
> first lobe has maximum radiation in a vertical.  That the 43' or
> or 44' vertical happens to be generally non-resonant in all of the
> HF bands is fortuitous but not necessarily by design.
>
>> I have a 43' vertical with one of AD5X's 160 and 80 matching systems
>> at the base fed with an UN-UN and it works great.
>
> Without base matching and a decent ground system, the 43' vertical is
> terribly inefficient on 160 and 80 meters (substantially less than
> 1/4 wave and extremely reactive) due to very high SWR losses in any
> practical feedline (using coax) length.
>
> One would be much better served to use two radiators, one longer than
> 43' (perhaps 85 feet) for improved efficiency on 160/80 and one shorter
> (perhaps 25 feet) to reduce the substantial amount of RF that is lost
> at take-off angles above the critical angle on 15/12/10 meters, along
> with an automatic tuner at the base of the antenna.
>
> An untuned (un-un fed) 43' vertical is the 21st century equivalent
> of an Isoloop or Gotham vertical ... nothing but snake oil designed
> to fool the unwary, those who don't understand electromagnetics, and
> those who believe in something for nothing.
>
> 73,
>
>     ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
> On 3/8/2011 6:47 PM, w5ov at w5ov.com wrote:
>> None of these old wive's tales are true.
>>
>> The 43' length is a convenient non-resonant length - nothing else.
>>
>> The balun was chosen originally because the 43' vertical was originally
>> planned to have one or two elevated radials only (making it balanced),
>> and
>> it would load fine with a balun.
>>
>> The problems came to be when full-blown radial systems were attached and
>> station grounds were connected to the radials, which again, were
>> originally intended to be elevated - i.e.; not grounded. What this did
>> was
>> to short one side of the output of the balun to ground. So, when you
>> ground the radials, an UN-UN is preferable and works very well.
>>
>> I have a 43' vertical with one of AD5X's 160 and 80 matching systems at
>> the base fed with an UN-UN and it works great.
>>
>> I use it on all bands - 160 through 10m. Check out the ZL8X online log
>> with my call to see how well it works.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Bob W5OV
>>
>>
>>
>>> I've heard quite a few people use balun, when they meant impedence
>>> transformer or unun.
>>>
>>> I heard somewhere (and the tapes have been erased) that the 43' length
>>> came about
>>> because it was the most economical length for a manufacturer to cut
>>> stock
>>> with the
>>> least waste to meet shipping limitations.
>>>
>>> 73, Mike NF4L
>>>
>>> On 3/8/2011 5:29 PM, David Herring wrote:
>>>> Here's a follow-on question to the reflector...
>>>>
>>>> Vernon's set-up brings a question to mind.  He says he's using a 4:1
>>>> balun on his vertical.  At first brush that seems counterintuitive,
>>>> doesn't it?  Isn't a vertical unbalanced?  Certainly the coax is
>>>> unbalanced.  When you're mating an unbalanced feedline with an
>>>> unbalanced antenna, wouldn't one be better off using an unun rather
>>>> than
>>>> a 4:1 balun?
>>>>
>>>> In further support of my line of questioning, I've read numerous,
>>>> albeit
>>>> anecdotal, reports of people being displeased with the performance of
>>>> their vertical, particularly the untuned ones like Zero-Five for
>>>> example. But when they add an unun they are then amazed at how the
>>>> antenna allegedly "sprung to life."
>>>>
>>>> 73,
>>>> Dave  AH6TD
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 8, 2011, at 6:20 AM, Vernon Mauery wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Yes.  I can see the S-meter go from 3-4 down with static down to
>>>>> nothing with quieter static.  My best guess is that I am not trying
>>>>> the right times at the right places.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks to everyone for the help.
>>>>>
>>>>> --Vernon N7OH
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 8:12 AM, Ross Primrose N4RP<n4rp at aiko.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Does the received noise decrease when you disconnect the antenna?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 73, Ross N4RP
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/8/2011 1:06 AM, Vernon Mauery wrote:
>>>>>>> At the risk of exposing what a n00b I am when it comes to HF, I
>>>>>>> really
>>>>>>> need some help.  I recently (last month) purchased a K3.  First HF
>>>>>>> radio I have owned.  I got my license 2 years ago and have spent
>>>>>>> most
>>>>>>> of the time since playing with VHF.  I have been trying to teach
>>>>>>> myself CW and decided that it was time to step into the HF waters.
>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>> studied, ogled, and dreamed of my ideal HF transceiver.  I finally
>>>>>>> found the K3 and having looked (at least a cursory glance) at all
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> others, I was sold.  I saved my pennies and purchased.  I also got
>>>>>>> myself a 43' untuned vertical antenna, balun, and radial wires.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My setup: K3/100 has 100 feet of low loss 400 coax out to the 43
>>>>>>> foot
>>>>>>> vertical on the hill in my back yard.  It has 8 25 foot radials and
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>> 4:1 balun.  The K3 has the KATU3, KPA3, KTCXO3-1, KFL3A-400, and
>>>>>>> default 2.8KHz filters.  I assembled it and did followed the
>>>>>>> calibration instructions as well as I could.  I think I got
>>>>>>> everything, but obviously I missed something.  Or maybe I just need
>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>> elmer to tell me what to do.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I cannot seem to find any signals that make the S meter go above a
>>>>>>> 3
>>>>>>> or 4.  I have the RF gain turned up a fair ways (mostly to the
>>>>>>> top),
>>>>>>> and I can hear static.  As I tune up some of the bands on SSB, I
>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>> hear a tone that changes higher in pitch as I tune up in frequency.
>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>> have tried listening for CW, but I am hearing nothing as I scan
>>>>>>> through the bands.  I had a 10m horizontal dipole taped to my wall
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> a while until I found time to run the coax out to the back yard.  I
>>>>>>> had hoped that since it was resonant on the 10m band, maybe it
>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>> be able to pick up something, but it was no better (or worse) than
>>>>>>> my
>>>>>>> vertical.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As far as I can tell, the radio seems to transmit.  I can see the
>>>>>>> power meter moving and the SWR meter moving.  The ATU seems to be
>>>>>>> able
>>>>>>> to find acceptable settings on most of the bands with the vertical.
>>>>>>> But I can't hear them.  You can't work them if you can't hear them,
>>>>>>> right?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is a desperate plea for help.  Is it the radio or me?  Please
>>>>>>> have pity on the n00b and walk me through my first HF contact.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --Vernon N7OH
>>>>>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>>>>>> Elecraft mailing list
>>>>>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>>>>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>>>>>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>>>>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> FCC Section 97.313(a) “At all times, an amateur station must use the
>>>>>> minimum transmitter power necessary to carry out the desired
>>>>>> communications.”
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>>>>> Elecraft mailing list
>>>>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>>>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>>>>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>>>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>>>>
>>>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>>>> Elecraft mailing list
>>>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>>>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>>>>
>>>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>>> Elecraft mailing list
>>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>>>
>>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> Elecraft mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>>
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>

More information about the Elecraft mailing list