[Scanner] "Waterfowl" antennas

Harry Marnell [email protected]
Sat, 15 Jun 2002 18:20:26 -0700


For folks more inclined to take the simplest route with most-familiar =
units of measurement, another "formula" for determining the length of a =
half-wave is to divide 5616 by the frequency in MHz, which gives you the =
approximate halfwave length in inches... e.g.

for 150 Mhz:   5616 / 150 =3D 37.44"
for  42 Mhz:    5616 / 42  =3D 133.71"  (a definite problem with a =
handheld!)
for  460 Mhz   5616 / 460 =3D 12.21"
for  850 Mhz   5616 / 850 =3D  6.61"
for  900 Mhz   5616 / 900 =3D  6.24" =20

Quarter-wavelength antennas would be exactly half those lengths, of =
course [or 2808/MHz - F (in)]

Harry Marnell
http://www.snowcrest.net/marnells/kma367.htm  <~~ LAPD Communications =
History

----- Original Message -----=20
From: "Edmund F Leavitt" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2002 17:46
Subject: [Scanner] "Waterfowl" antennas


>=20
> On Sat, 15 Jun 2002 17:46:18 -0500 "Mike Urich" <[email protected]> =
writes:
> > From: "anthony costa" <[email protected]>
> >=20
> > I have a radio shack pro 91.I listen mainly around the 800-900 mhz=20
> > freq,I
> > now use a telescopic antenna in the retracted position.6" in=20
> > height.the
> > signal's are in and out.Now on the vhf freq's it has great=20
> > sensitivity,But i
> > listen mainly on 800 mhz.any good ht antenna's for this band??
> >=20
> >=20
> ****************************************************************
>         c.  A half wave antenna is generally able to perform well,
> independent of a ground plane, making it desirable for use on hand =
held
> devices.  (Another place this comes in handy is for mounting on
> fiberglass roofs of travel trailers and the like.)  Typical designs
> include end fed coil matched "whips", and at higher frequencies, =
center
> fed "coaxial" or "sleeve" antennas.   =20
>=20
> [As an aside:  If you've ever wonder how long is a half wave antenna, =
the
> math is simple...divide 150 by the frequency in MHz and you have the
> approximate length of a half wavelength IN METERS.   If you are more
> comfortable with inches, you can approximate  by multiplying meters =
times
> 39.   eg.  150/900 MHz =3D 0.16 meters or about 6 1/2 inches.
>=20
> That says that if you are looking for a half wave antenna, expect it =
to
> be about one meter long for 150 MHz,  0.3 meters or 30 centimeters =
long
> at 450 MHz,  around 18 centimeters for Cellular/Trunked freqs, and =
around
> 16 centimeters for 900 MHz.]
> Recommendations:=20
>         a.   If you are receiving the stations in your area well with
> whatever you presently use, be happy...invest your money in the stock
> market.  If you need better, buy better.=20
>         b.  If you use the factory rubber duck a lot, recognize that =
it
> is designed to work fairly well in the 153 MHz range.    Consider =
buying
> one(s) designed specifically for the frequency ranges you like.   Same
> comment applies for mobile antennas.  With either, it's probably
> reasonable to ignore the difference between a cellular (824-896 MHz)
> antenna, an "800" (806-866 MHz) antenna, and a "900" (865-965 MHz)
> antenna.  The profusion of cellphones probably makes mobile cell =
antennas
> the easiest to find and the cheapest to afford.=20
>         c.    Want to play around to see just how foul that fowl =
antenna
> is?  Find a weak station in the 860 part of the band using your =
factory
> rubber duck antenna.  Listen with the squelch open or just barely =
closed.
>   Cut a paper clip to 3 3/4 inches in length (approximating a 1/4
> wavelength antenna at 860 MHz).  Make sure there are no jagged ends on
> the paper clip that could damage the radio's BNC contacts.  While
> monitoring a weak conversation, carefully replace the duck with the =
paper
> clip, by inserting the end of the clip into the center contacts of the
> BNC connector.  Let go of the paper clip.  Also, be certain not to =
change
> the radio's position when you switch back and forth.  If the duck =
works
> consistently as well or better, keep it.=20
>=20
> If the 1/4 wavelength paper clip works consistently better, I would
> consider shopping for a UHF antenna.  Splurge on a half wave 800 MHz
> rubber duck.  It will probably be worth the bucks.   Does this =
procedure
> sound too simple and too crude to be meaningful?  It is not.  I'd be
> interested to hear from a few users how their factory ducks stand up
> against the 1/4 clip.=20
> ***************************************************************
> Edmund Leavitt                        Ph:    253 582-5034              =
 =20
>             =20
> Ham/MARS/SHARES:               KA7UKN / AFA5AH / KPS654      =20
> Lakewood, WA                         N 47=BA 09'   W122=BA 31'
> _______________________________________________
> Scanner mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/scanner
>=20


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
or had an attachment. Attachments are not allowed.
Please post in Plain-Text only.---