NEW CHA F-LOOP 2.0 from Chameleon Antenna is NOW AVAILABLE!

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by KI6TRA, Apr 30, 2017.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: L-MFJ
ad: HRDLLC-2
ad: abrind-2
ad: Left-3
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: Left-2
ad: L-Geochron
  1. K1DOS

    K1DOS Ham Member QRZ Page

    I have both the F-Loop and P-Loop v2.o and they work great. I have made dozens of videos on YouTube showing these antennas in use. If you are looking for a quality HF antenna with a low profile that does not involve throwing water bottles, hammers, wrenches with strings over tree limbs - then then try a loop antenna. I have operated off of decks, inside cabins, in the field with these antennas with no problems. My one recommendation would be to buy extra Velcro straps for your kit - they are easily lost in the field. I purchased extra straps in bring colors and they work great.
     
    OH8STN and KI6TRA like this.
  2. WB0ZRD

    WB0ZRD XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    And hallelujah and a big amen that this is over!
     
  3. KD5QHB

    KD5QHB Ham Member QRZ Page

    Hell I'd like to acquire a loop for testing too!!! My QRZ address is good also!! Just FYI... y'all probably will not get it back!!!
     
  4. OH8STN

    OH8STN Ham Member QRZ Page

    Would you please post a link to your channel or playlist? I like to share videos from other operators using similar or the same equipment that I have.
    Thanks
    Julian
     
  5. OH8STN

    OH8STN Ham Member QRZ Page

    Agreed!
    It could take a few months to save up the pennies to get the W4OP loop here for field testing. Then we can come back to this topic, taking them out in the field where it matters. Also do it without abusing one manufacturer or the other.

    Julian
     
  6. AA5CT

    AA5CT Ham Member QRZ Page

    Julian, here is a webpage showing the results of what I term "comparative antenna testing" where the accrued WSPR SNR data from the two antennas under test as received at various spotter stations were plotted. The two antennas under test were excited simultaneously (this works to offset varying ionospheric conditions that affect propagation over time) with WSPR signals from two transmitters separated in frequency by about 100 Hz or so in the WSPR band :

    http://www.qsl.net/w/wb5wpa//EHantenna/EH_Mark_2_Vert/

    Just two quick examples of data plots :

    [​IMG]
    The K9AN station is 1086 km at 42 deg AZ from transmitting station WB5WPA

    and :

    [​IMG]
    DK6UG at 8225 km and 41 deg AZ from transmitting station


    I won't go into details how all this was accomplished (or what caveats should be observed on several fronts), as that would be too big a diversion on this thread.

    Jim
     
    OH8STN likes this.
  7. AA5CT

    AA5CT Ham Member QRZ Page

    Julian, those are a good start for evaluating a "turn key" commercial product that targets a particular user (or product) demographic. Most of the work I've done the last few years has been in the vein of "proof of concept" evaluation of various 'raw' antenna types like the EH (and spin-offs), the DLM (by Robert Vincent), various loops etc. where final 'form factor' and beauty is not a design or targeted consideration!

    Quickie lash-ups like this design that used cheap 17 ga (.045 inch) AL wire, 10 inches of 1 and 5/8 inch Andrews Heliax tie-wrapped to some locally-grown cane (bamboo) poles :

    [​IMG]

    Jim
     
  8. OH8STN

    OH8STN Ham Member QRZ Page

    Thanks for the feedback Jim.
    On the bench is a WSPRlite and idea for testing. The test methodology was recently validated by Richard @ SOTABeams in his blog "Testing a Test Methodology"
    That article can be read here.

    This type of testing methodology is attractive as it allows "Joe Average" radio operator to get out in the field to replicate tests, with minimal gear and investment. More data from more sources can validate or perhaps invalidate claims based on what might've been erroneous modelling to begin with.
    Awesome point Jim. I'm right there with you.

    Julian
    .
     
  9. KD6RF

    KD6RF Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Sometimes I can't tell if my friend and big crazy neighbor Jim is making a joke or not (j/k about that "crazy" part :):eek::))

    As you may recall, I did model it, but I'll be darned if I can find the saved results. :( If memory serves, recall that it matched up well with all that data we took on 160 M and 80 M WSPR. ) It was a capable antenna that took advantage of that handy r^4function of loop radius vs. loss, and ended up at only a negative few dBi - very impressive for such a relatively small antenna, especially on 160 M :)

    We may have disagreed on this part however, the originating idea on the edginton website about some mysterious "new loop excitation method" was mostly wrong :( IOW, the loop works well!, but because of our r^4 friend in the loss equation, not some mysterious new configuration.

    For me, I recall 2 "bottom lines" - 1) is that it pays to think about mid-sized loops that gave Jim a pretty nice 160 M and 80 M footprint from a small antenna - and - 2) "model this" worked out quite well :D - although it took a fair amount of time a forum bandwidth to resolve the extreme common-mode issues with the measurement...


    Although the highly imbalanced feed on Jim's (old?) loop was at first tricky to get the measurement to match up to the model, in the end, it matched quite well:rolleyes: - as it ALWAYS does when the details are properly accounted for ---- including as discussed on this thread above, the use of ALUMINUM for the loop material as instead of copper for the STL's / mag loops ....
     
    Last edited: May 5, 2017
  10. KM4CQG

    KM4CQG XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    I'm very tempted to try it the setup time is so fast especially compared to my Buddipole.

    Ian
     
    KD5QHB likes this.

Share This Page