Reg, in A/B tests with a standard dipole, the cage was "quieter". That is, I
am able to hear weaker signals with less noise. Anecdotal at best, but keeps
me using one.

I am under 2:1 from 3575 to 3925 with no tuner. I suspect that if I were
using copper Vs the fence wire the Q would be higher and the results more in
agreement with your cage program.

Besides it gives me a warm fuzzy feeling and impresses the neighbors.


"Reg Edwards" wrote in message
...
The only difference in performance between a cage antenna and an ordinary
thin-wire dipole is a modest increase in bandwidth. There is no increase
in
radiating/receiving efficience.

The increase in bandwidth is much less than is popularly supposed and may
not be considered worth the extra construction costs and inconvenience.

To predict resonant frequency, bandwidth and a few other characteristics
from overall length, number of cage wires from 1 to N, and wire diameter,
download program DIPCAGE from website below.

Download DIPCAGE in a few seconds, no unzipping inconvenience, run
immediately.
----
=======================
Regards from Reg, G4FGQ
For Free Radio Design Software
go to http://www.g4fgq.com
=======================

Dear W4JLE

I think you should be aware that, as perceived at the receiver end, the
characteristics of the feedline, its length and SWR, and tuner can have at
least as great an effect on operating bandwidth as the antenna constuction
itself. Antenna height above ground can seriously affect bandwidth.
Lowering height can increase bandwidth more than changing from from a thin
wire to big fat cage.

There's far too much attention paid to the subject of wire diameter by the
gurus who have heard a rumour that wire diameter increases bandwidth and
can't resist repeating the story on every possible occasion. I produced the
program to put the matter into quantitative perspective.

As for a fat antenna's remarkable ability to distinguish favourably between
signals and noise I can suggest only that your A-B tests were not quite what
you thought they were. Displacement, orientation, noise in a null,
different receiver?

With MY neighbours the only warm fuzzy feelings have to be alcohol-assisted.
---
Reg
====================================

"w4jle" W4JLE(remove this to wrote in message
...
Reg, in A/B tests with a standard dipole, the cage was "quieter". That is,
I
am able to hear weaker signals with less noise. Anecdotal at best, but
keeps
me using one.

I am under 2:1 from 3575 to 3925 with no tuner. I suspect that if I were
using copper Vs the fence wire the Q would be higher and the results more
in
agreement with your cage program.

Besides it gives me a warm fuzzy feeling and impresses the neighbors.


"Reg Edwards" wrote in message
...
The only difference in performance between a cage antenna and an
ordinary
thin-wire dipole is a modest increase in bandwidth. There is no
increase
in
radiating/receiving efficience.

The increase in bandwidth is much less than is popularly supposed and
may
not be considered worth the extra construction costs and inconvenience.

To predict resonant frequency, bandwidth and a few other characteristics
from overall length, number of cage wires from 1 to N, and wire
diameter,
download program DIPCAGE from website below.

Download DIPCAGE in a few seconds, no unzipping inconvenience, run
immediately.
----
=======================
Regards from Reg, G4FGQ
For Free Radio Design Software
go to http://www.g4fgq.com
=======================

Thus the reason they make chocolate and vanilla, we all get a choice.

I choose the cage, don't confuse me with the facts.


"Reg Edwards" wrote in message
...
Dear W4JLE

I think you should be aware that, as perceived at the receiver end, the
characteristics of the feedline, its length and SWR, and tuner can have at
least as great an effect on operating bandwidth as the antenna constuction
itself. Antenna height above ground can seriously affect bandwidth.
Lowering height can increase bandwidth more than changing from from a thin
wire to big fat cage.