[Elecraft] Beam antenna question

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

On 5/21/2017 12:45 AM, Vic Rosenthal wrote:
> The TH11DXX that G3TXQ compares to the Hexbeam has at least 3 
> elements on each band and is a modern design, no traps.
The TH11 has driven elements for 12, 17, 15, 12 and 10 (2) with
reflectors for 20 and 17 and trapped directors for 10, 15 and 20.
Element spacing is nowhere near optimum and, other than the DE,
any 12 meter performance is nearly accidental.

> If someone found that the C3 (2 el on each band) outperformed it, I
> would be very suspicious that something was wrong with the sample
> tested.
You are welcome to argue with K7LXC/N0AX but their testing protocol
is well documented and they do not indicate any abnormal behavior
in the tested TH11 where they do note issues with other antennas.

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV


On 5/21/2017 12:45 AM, Vic Rosenthal wrote:
> The TH11DXX that G3TXQ compares to the Hexbeam has at least 3 elements on each band and is a modern design, no traps. If someone found that the C3 (2 el on each band) outperformed it, I would be very suspicious that something was wrong with the sample tested.
> I did look at the wrong picture and you are correct that the XR5 is 9 elements.
> 
> Vic 4X6GP
> 
>> On 20 May 2017, at 23:28, Joe Subich, W4TV <lists at subich.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Why do you think it will "significantly outperform the hex beams?"
>>
>> Based on the performance data (K7LXC/N0AX) for the original Force 12
>> C3 and TH11 with comparisons of the broadband Hexbeam and the TH11.
>> The K7LXC/N0AX field data shows the C3 outperforming the TH11 while
>> G3TXQ's web page <http://www.karinya.net/g3txq/hexbeam/broadband/>
>> shows the TH11 with approximately 3 dB advantage over the broadband
>> hexbeam.
>>
>>> I wouldn't say an 11 element yagi with capacity hats on the elements
>>> has an especially low visual profile!
>>
>> Neither the XR5 nor the Navassa 5 has 11 elements *or* capacity hats.
>> The XR5 is a 9-element antenna and the Navassa 5 has 10 elements as
>> documented in the two links I provided.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>>    ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>>
>>> On 5/20/2017 3:34 PM, Vic Rosenthal wrote:
>>> Why do you think it will "significantly outperform the hex beams?"
>>> The point about uv is well taken re fiberglass, but I don't know what the cords on all the hexbeam versions are made of. There are uv resistant materials available.
>>> I wouldn't say an 11 element yagi with capacity hats on the elements has an especially low visual profile!
>>>
>>> Vic 4X6GP
>>>
>>>> On 20 May 2017, at 19:36, Joe Subich, W4TV <lists at subich.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 5/20/2017 11:32 AM, Terry Brown wrote:
>>>>> These beams are not cheap,  I don't want to be taking the beam down
>>>>> and replacing main structural components every 5 yrs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can anyone with a hex beam comment on this?
>>>>
>>>> Your concerns are well placed with antennas made of fiberglass and
>>>> dacron/kevlar cords.
>>>>
>>>> Instead of a hexbeam, I would recommend looking at the Innovantennas
>>>> XR5T: <http://innovantennas.com/antennas-a-accesories/on-line-shop/view/productdetails/virtuemart_product_id/435/virtuemart_category_id/55.html>,
>>>> or the JK Antennas Navassa 5:
>>>> <https://jkantennas.com/jk-navassa-5.html>
>>>>
>>>> Both have boom lengths of 12 feet or less, cover 20 - 10 meters and
>>>> have optional 6 meter add-ons.  Either should significantly out
>>>> perform the hex beams and - since they are aluminum antennas that do
>>>> not use UV sensitive fiberglass, kevlar and dacron components - should
>>>> significantly outlast the hexbeam with significantly less maintenance.
>>>>
>>>> 73,
>>>>
>>>>   ... Joe, W4TV
>>>>>
>>>
>