| Author |
Message |
    
mikefromms
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 4:53 pm: | 
|
Anyone here use the thunder base antenna that is both omni and bi-directional beam? This thing must be the 2000 version of the Super Scanner. It looks like the end of a mixer or a bug zapper.
Mikefromms |
bruce
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 8:50 pm: |
|
could it be simular to the 2 meter EB-144 eggbeater M2 antenna? its under products 2 meter eb-144
http://www.m2inc.com/
|
bruce
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 8:53 pm: |
|
The super scanner used 3 driven elements and produced about 5 db of gain i build one for 52.525 in the 70's and it worked very well but 8 elements ? anything over 4 would cancle each other out |
Jellybean
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 10:38 pm: |
|
I have one of the Signal Engineering Thunder 8's.
It does as described. It'll go front and back or side to side, N-S or E-W. Not really like a true beam but similar. It basically is the Super Scanner. I put up a beam because I wanted more gain and rejections, but all in all, it's not a bad antenna. |
bruce
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 11:15 pm: |
|
Very Intresting...... Its not a super scanner that used 3 phased dypoles but 2 cross phased loops. Still ( and i find the paterns hard to beleve ) it would give some gain and directivy.
You could get the same thing from 2 phased A-99 or I-max's
Bruce
|
RCI 2990
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 1:43 am: |
|
I knew a guy that ran a super scanner up until about 2000 when a twister tore it and his house down. He replaced it with a lowly ol' A 99. The super scanner worked very well for him and he loved it. When it got ruined he wanted to see if i could scare one up for him off of E Bay.. |
mikefromms
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 7:12 am: |
|
Jellybean, so the thing does do what it claims. Where can you buy these things or get the best price?
mikefromms |
bruce
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 9:14 am: |
|
LON !
COPPER NEEDS TO MARKET A SUPER SCANNER !
so i can cut it down to 52.525 lol |
Scrapiron63
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 10:18 am: |
|
Wonder where I might find the instructions/parts list for a Super Scanner. I've got one in the barn, looks like its all there except the elements, and the coax needs replacing. The control box lights up and looks good. I've got lots of old beam elements that should work, might be interesting to try that old antenna from the past. scrapiron
SCRAPIRON,
Try Calling COPPER 1-800-626-6343 they have them on hand. Ask for the Instruction Manual for the SUPER SCANNER Model MS119.
Lon
Tech808
|
Scrapiron63
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 12:00 pm: |
|
Well datgum, thanks Lon, didn't think about Copper having them, need to order a couple more things anyway.
You are welcome, glad to help.
Lon |
mikefromms
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 5:44 pm: |
|
Does Signal Engineering exaggerate their gain figures? The Thunder 8 claims something like 7.5 dbi which would translate to about 5.4 dbd gain. What is your take on this, anyone?
mikefromms |
Tech808
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2003 - 7:27 pm: |
|
Mike,
I brought the site up and it shows 6.8DBi
Take that and subtract the 2.1 from the DBi like Tech833 told people to do and you have 4.7
Lon
Tech808
|
409
| | Posted on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 3:31 am: |
|
Does anyone know or have a assembly/owners manual for one of the old Super Scanner antennas produced by Antenna Speciallsts ?? I'm kinda in need of a repro or original . Copper sold one at one time, but i can't find it on their website. |
Tech808
| | Posted on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 5:05 pm: |
|
409,
Call Copper 1-800-626-6343, they had them on hand last month when we were down there.
Lon
Tech808
|
mikefromms
| | Posted on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 5:32 pm: |
|
So, this is 4.7 dbd and the real gain? That is quite a lot compared to a groundplane.
mikefromms |
mikefromms
| | Posted on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 5:46 pm: |
|
Why don't we see Thunder 8 in stores?
mikefromms |
Tech808
| | Posted on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 7:43 pm: |
|
Mikefromms,
Come on Mike, if you went to the web site I listed it explains the 8XB very well and why the gain is higher.
As for the other question's, Anthony list's his number on his site and he is far more qualified to answer these question's for you on his product's than any us on the Forum.
As a "Extra Class" are you Testing Us with all these antenna question's?
Lon
Tech808
|
Bullet
| | Posted on Saturday, August 02, 2003 - 2:56 am: |
|
using "1005" for wavelength of driven element.
a cubical quad driven element will produce .86db more gain than a dipole. (2.2 + .86) = 3.06
a circle shaped driven element will produce 1.13db
more gain than a dipole. (2.2 + 1.13) = 3.33
a delta loop driven element will produce .55db
over a dipole. (2.2 + .55) = 2.75
a diamond and the cubical are so close they are normally lumped as cubical.as octagon loops are lumped in with circle loops.
the curtain quad,and dopple quad both have high gain figures around 7db+
and a rectangle loop has 1.5 db over dipole
so ya, i thinks thier gain figures are a bit inflated. but the thing is so is everyone elses!
and SE beams do work very well as will anyone that owns a set will atest to.
i believe they will out perform anything on the "cb market" of similar element count and boom size.
but they have thier flaws as well.
the holes the elements go through on the boom are notorious for wallowing out.
they only have one bolt going through it to hold in place there.
i think they should offset drill the booms to have 2 bolts to hold the element inplace as this will prevent the falcrum effect.
alot of guys simply tig weld them together as well.
and id rather use spiders so i could adjust the spacings a bit if i was so inclined. on his you run whats set and thats it. witch may be no big deal unless you like to taylor things to your own liking.
i also dont like to have my elements closed by bolts holding the ends together like them and the moonrakers do. (electralisus)(horible speller)
i close mine with a few winds of the copper tail and a good soldering then bolt together the ends to the spreader rods.
but all and all i like them alot. |
Bullet
| | Posted on Saturday, August 02, 2003 - 3:57 pm: |
|
look at thier lightning 4
the figures.
boom length 15'2" (less than 1/2wave long)
gain 14.6dbi
f to back 38db
f to side 38db
to reach this gain for real you would need a six element beam at about 1 wave long and have a front to back in the high twenties to low thirties
reflector @ 1.1 ~ spacing @ .15~
radiator @ 1.2 ~
directors @ .90 ~ spacing @ .3~ |
mikefromms
| | Posted on Saturday, August 02, 2003 - 7:34 pm: |
|
This turned into a good and interesting post. Now, let's talk about the I-max 2000 and the gp/k some more...
mikefromms |
bruce
| | Posted on Saturday, August 02, 2003 - 10:37 pm: |
|
bullet i have had 4 elem wide space beams gain real +8dbd on a 3/4 wave boom i go with your numbers when i stacked the 6 meter 4 elem hygains 5/8 wave apart ( 12 foot ) they were good for about 11 DBD or 13.5 dbi there is no 4 elem ant that is going to give that kinda gain ...... please no ground enhancememt ..... As for how they worked well i could work 100-150 miles on 6 just about 24/7/365 with them at 50 foot!
As for this turn style phased antenna it will give SOME gain but look at the lobes you have HOLES in coverage if they are correct now the old SUPER SCANNER did not it had 3 120 deg lobes!
I would like to get a spec sheet / building instructions for this antenna and scale it down to VHF for testing ???? when i get time ....
someday |
Bullet
| | Posted on Sunday, August 03, 2003 - 3:12 am: |
|
bruce,
rodger that,(yagi's i assume)
very do-able on wider spacings and longer booms.
witch is what i was trying to show with those examples above.
i also agree a boom under 1/2 wave aint gona give you 14 dbi like all the antenna company's want you to believe.
i know thier in the market to sell antennas but its like "the first liar". the first liar never has a chance because the next one always tells a bigger tale.
"ive figure some must add 5db for ground gain,others only 3db". thats something they shouldnt even count imho.
so it is with advertised gain and then people get used to those numbers and take it as a fact.
so when a guy comes along with a snuffy made beam and claim 11 dbi from a 27 foot boom antenna everyone tells him its junk because thier 12-16 footers have 3db more gain.....lol.
and dont get me started on the popular 6 and 8 element beams for gain, 16-19+dbi
a 10 element quad @ 2.5wave boom would be in the 16.6dbi area. thats a 90 foot boom on 11meters people. a pipe dream at best!
a 8 element quad @ 1.9 wavelength comes in at around 68.4 feet long and has a 15.7dbi gain.
this is do-able for some with alot of land and no trees close in. but a pipe dream as well for most of us. i dont think i could turn one here unless it was over 80 feet high then it would come down the first storm. |
mikefromms
| | Posted on Sunday, August 03, 2003 - 6:29 pm: |
|
Maybe I should find another site.
mikefromms |
Tech833
| | Posted on Monday, August 04, 2003 - 12:08 pm: |
|
Mike,
The frutration you have is beacuse you are asking people for their opinions and then losing patience because they are not using scientific terms to your satisfaction. They are giving you what you asked, their opinion.
What you are asking is for someone to make up your mind for you. Nobody here wants to do that. We all embrace your questions and will happily provide all the opinions you could ever ask for.
In order to get the answers you want, it is time to open some books. Antenna theory would answer 90% of your questions thus far with the scientific proof that you seem to thirst for.
I suggest you go to your local book store and purchase the 'ARRL Antenna Book'. It is also available via mail order from AES and HRO. It is a good read, and will keep your attention for hours.
Then, you can come back on the forum and teach all of us a thing or two! |
mikefromms
| | Posted on Monday, August 04, 2003 - 9:00 pm: |
|
This is the best site out there.
mikefromms |
Tech833
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 05, 2003 - 1:35 am: |
|
Yes it is. Did my post have any effect at all? |
Bullet
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 05, 2003 - 1:38 am: |
|
thiers so many sharp people on this forum!
and good modurators,techs. this has always been one of my favorite radio websites because of the good crowd we have here.
everyone learns something when they stop here and read sooner or later,and if they dont its because thier day dreaming about that new radio they want!
for me its that galaxy 93T............
i wish i knew more about it. |
Kevin Woodall (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 09, 2005 - 11:46 pm: |
|
Hello all. Is this thing still up? Just happened to find it. I have a Super Scanner on a 50 foot tower with a Pres. Washington. I like it. It was a gift, I have had to do some solder run jumping on a couple bad runs on the board, but all it well except in Omni mode, can't get SWR's down. I have the manual if anyone needs, I can scan and email. |
Mikefromms
Intermediate Member
Username: Mikefromms
Post Number: 456
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2005 - 8:12 pm: |
|
You are lucky. That was one of the best ideas in an antenna ever. The only thing I would change is use 3 coaxes and switch box and get away from the telephone wire connectors.
mikefromms |
Syklopz
New member
Username: Syklopz
Post Number: 6
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 16, 2005 - 10:49 pm: |
|
Kevin again. I was thinking about 3 coax's and a switch. I don't really care about the omni mode anyway. Has good ears and a breeze to switch. Someone local told me that wouldn't work, I don't know why not. The schmatic seems like it would. I am up and running, SW element has intermitant SWR highs, but I am tired of climbing for now. Next time it is down we may just run 3 coax's. |
