Lightning does indeed create EMP. It generates broad spectrum RF and EMP (electromagnetic pulse). It's known as LEMP (lightning electromagnetic pulse). I repair several receivers and transceivers every year that have been damaged by LEMP caused by a near by a lightning strikes. It's more powerful than man made NNEMP (non nuclear electromagnetic pulse) and less powerful a nuclear EMP. That's why lightning arrestors are so important. They may not protect you from a direct strike but they will protect your equipment from the enormous electromagnetic surge from a near by lightning strike as well as ESD from static charge build up on antennas.
Thanks Mike, I gathered that it would be all LEMP'd into the same massive blast 😅 I didn't know it had a cool term! I'm happy to hear your still poppin lids man, the efhw bit: the .05λ counter poise length should be about right so I use a 17' side for my 80 horizontal. Dove deep into crazy mixed up random antennas and it's been much fun, I have some cool transformers I make, check muh channel 🍺🍺
Great show ! Carbon FREE antenna mast. This will reduce carbon emissions at 1.5 KW . I herd Chuck on 10 meters talking to England. It's on DC commander live stream. He did 2 live streams at once. The EMP from lightning is not the same as nuclear EMP. Lightning has AMPS and VOLTS . This makes a magnetic field. like current in a wire . Also can make electromagnetic induction this is how a lightning strike can damage near buy stuff. All lightning not the same. Different energy level. Also different polarity.That Why sometimes different colors of lightning can happen. We got pink lightning from summer storm. Also the sound of thunder is different. High energy is normally bright blue and looks wight. has a very loud sharp crack of thunder. My AM radio station took a direct hit on 1 of 4 towers. No damage on that tower but burnt paint. The far tower 1 red light down it blew the lamp. All outher tow lights stayed on and fine. it did arc the feedline on 1 tower and took station off line. Did not hurt the tube output transmitter. But had to put back up transmitter on line and use alternate feedline and single tower feed to get temp back on air until repairs made . This was during a blizzard in NY. Was fun remote in to get error codes and station back on. was no go. had to go to cite manually switch feed line. 73
@@TheSmokinApe I have been to NOAA seminar about lighting . Part of broadcast engineering. Yes weather changes SWR. At 50 KW it is a must watch and tune for as things change. We use UTC . we correct for local time zone and change as needed. I got both GPS time and WWV time at station. Only once both went down for a wile. Solar storm did it. But internet was up . never lost time sync . We have stable clock incase we do.
For my 1/2 λ dipoles I like 5/8 λ above ground. It’s why I don’t typically don’t use a dipole for lower than 20m band. I got a 10/20 fan dipole in my attic at about 44’ above grade and it gets me around the works and back.
On the height of antenna, yes, 0.5 x lambda or even 0.43 x lambda is the sweet spot for a dipole or an inverted vee. This assumes that your goal is the best DX signal from a dipole. If that is not your goal, if local comms is more your goal, then anything like 12 to 15 feet off the ground is fine. On SWR, even a SWR of 1.7 means that 93% of your power is still going into the antenna system and only 7% of power is being reflected. theres a cool table at EverythingRF that shows VSWR vs. % of power returned
@@dylanschulz2404 i have seen some sites, like N3FJP website in the "Dipoles & VEE" section, that shows 0.6 x lambda is a "sweet spot" for dipole. And the modeling of the antenna seems convincing. But Im only going by empirical evidence that .43 to .50 seems to work, at least on my vee at my QTH. Ive tried a bit higher, like 0.55 to 0.6 or so, and didnt see very much benefit. Conversely , 0.25 to 0.30 made the antenna more like an NVIS antenna.
Discussion at @20:00 or so is kind of frustrating to listen to. SWR is directly convertible to return loss, which tells you exactly how much power disappears into the antenna. Power to the antenna goes to two places -- radiation and loss. Loss is in resistive losses in the elements and dielectric losses in the near field (mainly). A non-resonant antenna is only "lossy" if it's built out of resistors. If you can get a match that puts the power into a non-resonant antenna, the power will radiate out of it just fine (hence, doublets, random wires, etc.). At 2:1 SWR, you have a return loss of 11dB, which means 89% of power goes into the antenna, the vast majority of which is radiated. It does not matter if the antenna is resonant or not. The phrase "half an swr point of power into the antenna" is so bizarre, it honestly compromises any reliability of anything else you say.
First, thank you for the feedback. "Discussion at @20:00 or so is kind of frustrating to listen to. SWR is directly convertible to return loss, which tells you exactly how much power disappears into the antenna." I'm familiar with retun loss and have a video on the relationship between RL and SWR. That said, you do want to take insertion loss from the coaxail cable if you want to know "exactly how much disappears". " A non-resonant antenna is only "lossy" if it's built out of resistors. " You do get loss from; tuners, matching networks, transmission line and transmission line transformers, correct? "The phrase "half an swr point of power into the antenna" is so bizarre, it honestly compromises any reliability of anything else you say." We were just BSing about antennas and SWR but I see and understand the point. Thanks again for the feedback and for watching...
@@TheSmokinApe Yes, coax between a matching network and a non-resonant antenna makes a big difference, but that's less to do with the question of resonance, because it's not the resonance in the antenna that's the problem. Tuner losses will be negligible, and transmission line loss is dependent on (A) whether there's a transmission line, and (B) what kind it is. A doublet with a parallel line feed has negligible loss in the feedline because it's inherently less lossy than coax, for example. IMO, putting some lossy feedline in the way distracts from the physics point that resonance does not make an antenna radiate any better. You can also have a resonant antenna that pays coax losses -- e.g., suppose you have a folded dipole that's resonant (200R+j0) that you match with a tuner and some coax -- same feedline losses as a non-resonant antenna in the feed line.
So stupid question, what do you all recommend if carbon fiber poles are bad? ~44:00 ish Also thank you all for being my elmers. Sorry I couldn't ask live, but you go live at about 4 am my time lol
Thanks! home made antennas and manual tuners perfect
Thanks Larry 👍
Lightning does indeed create EMP. It generates broad spectrum RF and EMP (electromagnetic pulse). It's known as LEMP (lightning electromagnetic pulse). I repair several receivers and transceivers every year that have been damaged by LEMP caused by a near by a lightning strikes. It's more powerful than man made NNEMP (non nuclear electromagnetic pulse) and less powerful a nuclear EMP. That's why lightning arrestors are so important. They may not protect you from a direct strike but they will protect your equipment from the enormous electromagnetic surge from a near by lightning strike as well as ESD from static charge build up on antennas.
I knew Jeem was talking a bunch of mess with that. Thanks for the info Mike 👍
Thanks Mike, I gathered that it would be all LEMP'd into the same massive blast 😅 I didn't know it had a cool term! I'm happy to hear your still poppin lids man, the efhw bit: the .05λ counter poise length should be about right so I use a 17' side for my 80 horizontal. Dove deep into crazy mixed up random antennas and it's been much fun, I have some cool transformers I make, check muh channel
🍺🍺
Gotta get me one of them coffee mugs 👍🏼 great stream as always guys…!
Thanks Zero, glad you enjoyed it 👍
@@TheSmokinApeP.S. loving the Poseidon 👍🏼 experimenting with elevated radials atm 🔥
Elevated? You are brave…
@lucky to have a big ass pine tree 80ft tall with a pulley right up top will aim for the feed point to be 8ft off the ground with sloping radials 😎
Thats cool
Interesting video busting common myths on antenna. You are looking sharp with the new goggles Mr. Ape.
Glad you liked it PZA, thanks for watching 👍
Great show ! Carbon FREE antenna mast. This will reduce carbon emissions at 1.5 KW . I herd Chuck on 10 meters talking to England. It's on DC commander live stream. He did 2 live streams at once. The EMP from lightning is not the same as nuclear EMP. Lightning has AMPS and VOLTS . This makes a magnetic field. like current in a wire . Also can make electromagnetic induction this is how a lightning strike can damage near buy stuff. All lightning not the same. Different energy level. Also different polarity.That Why sometimes different colors of lightning can happen. We got pink lightning from summer storm. Also the sound of thunder is different. High energy is normally bright blue and looks wight. has a very loud sharp crack of thunder. My AM radio station took a direct hit on 1 of 4 towers. No damage on that tower but burnt paint. The far tower 1 red light down it blew the lamp. All outher tow lights stayed on and fine. it did arc the feedline on 1 tower and took station off line. Did not hurt the tube output transmitter. But had to put back up transmitter on line and use alternate feedline and single tower feed to get temp back on air until repairs made . This was during a blizzard in NY. Was fun remote in to get error codes and station back on. was no go. had to go to cite manually switch feed line. 73
I knew Jeem was talking mess! Thanks for the info Robert 👍
@@TheSmokinApe I have been to NOAA seminar about lighting . Part of broadcast engineering. Yes weather changes SWR. At 50 KW it is a must watch and tune for as things change. We use UTC . we correct for local time zone and change as needed. I got both GPS time and WWV time at station. Only once both went down for a wile. Solar storm did it. But internet was up . never lost time sync . We have stable clock incase we do.
@ that sounds like a pretty cool setup
For my 1/2 λ dipoles I like 5/8 λ above ground. It’s why I don’t typically don’t use a dipole for lower than 20m band.
I got a 10/20 fan dipole in my attic at about 44’ above grade and it gets me around the works and back.
Thanks for the insight CB 👍
Love the comedy!
Thanks Horton 👍
On the height of antenna, yes, 0.5 x lambda or even 0.43 x lambda is the sweet spot for a dipole or an inverted vee. This assumes that your goal is the best DX signal from a dipole. If that is not your goal, if local comms is more your goal, then anything like 12 to 15 feet off the ground is fine. On SWR, even a SWR of 1.7 means that 93% of your power is still going into the antenna system and only 7% of power is being reflected. theres a cool table at EverythingRF that shows VSWR vs. % of power returned
.6
@@dylanschulz2404 i have seen some sites, like N3FJP website in the "Dipoles & VEE" section, that shows 0.6 x lambda is a "sweet spot" for dipole. And the modeling of the antenna seems convincing. But Im only going by empirical evidence that .43 to .50 seems to work, at least on my vee at my QTH. Ive tried a bit higher, like 0.55 to 0.6 or so, and didnt see very much benefit. Conversely , 0.25 to 0.30 made the antenna more like an NVIS antenna.
Hey Dan, your right about the 1.7 but I just wouldn't show it in a video 😳
"Insulin Truck" - ROTFL
🤣
Discussion at @20:00 or so is kind of frustrating to listen to. SWR is directly convertible to return loss, which tells you exactly how much power disappears into the antenna. Power to the antenna goes to two places -- radiation and loss. Loss is in resistive losses in the elements and dielectric losses in the near field (mainly). A non-resonant antenna is only "lossy" if it's built out of resistors. If you can get a match that puts the power into a non-resonant antenna, the power will radiate out of it just fine (hence, doublets, random wires, etc.).
At 2:1 SWR, you have a return loss of 11dB, which means 89% of power goes into the antenna, the vast majority of which is radiated. It does not matter if the antenna is resonant or not.
The phrase "half an swr point of power into the antenna" is so bizarre, it honestly compromises any reliability of anything else you say.
First, thank you for the feedback.
"Discussion at @20:00 or so is kind of frustrating to listen to. SWR is directly convertible to return loss, which tells you exactly how much power disappears into the antenna." I'm familiar with retun loss and have a video on the relationship between RL and SWR. That said, you do want to take insertion loss from the coaxail cable if you want to know "exactly how much disappears".
" A non-resonant antenna is only "lossy" if it's built out of resistors. " You do get loss from; tuners, matching networks, transmission line and transmission line transformers, correct?
"The phrase "half an swr point of power into the antenna" is so bizarre, it honestly compromises any reliability of anything else you say." We were just BSing about antennas and SWR but I see and understand the point. Thanks again for the feedback and for watching...
@@TheSmokinApe Yes, coax between a matching network and a non-resonant antenna makes a big difference, but that's less to do with the question of resonance, because it's not the resonance in the antenna that's the problem.
Tuner losses will be negligible, and transmission line loss is dependent on (A) whether there's a transmission line, and (B) what kind it is. A doublet with a parallel line feed has negligible loss in the feedline because it's inherently less lossy than coax, for example.
IMO, putting some lossy feedline in the way distracts from the physics point that resonance does not make an antenna radiate any better. You can also have a resonant antenna that pays coax losses -- e.g., suppose you have a folded dipole that's resonant (200R+j0) that you match with a tuner and some coax -- same feedline losses as a non-resonant antenna in the feed line.
So stupid question, what do you all recommend if carbon fiber poles are bad? ~44:00 ish
Also thank you all for being my elmers. Sorry I couldn't ask live, but you go live at about 4 am my time lol
Hey DH, we all like Fiber Glass 👍
Other wise get the mice out of ur face Ziggy.
@@mdwestlund1 the mice?
I'm trying man lol😅
Wa6ols Wes
@@mdwestlund1 howdy
Guys please stop dishing on Canada not all of us are sudo-europeans... regarding taxes thank NAFTA.
With the Canada stuff we are joking, mostly 😮
It was a skit, sorry
Vive Le Canada Français! 🇲🇶
...
(Bad joke from a Frenchman in the UK for over 25 years...)