Super nice job and video - very enjoyable. Keep up the good work. Best 73 and DX - Rich, W2FKN

Cool video. Thanks for sharing.

Excellent activation

lovely area there Michael. A great activation and the station with the frankentenna worked well ! 73

Looks like some nice April weather up there.

I’m liking that tuner with the Frakentenna. The only thing you had missing was the Chameleon Cap Hat placed between the 17” whip and the Mil Ext 2.0…. LOL. Thanks for another informative and entertaining video. Bill, KC2KNA

@KB9VBRAntennas

3 ай бұрын

I forgot the cap hat. That would have really turned this thing into a monstrosity.

@brentOhlookAsnake

3 ай бұрын

@@KB9VBRAntennasso I may try this set up tomorrow at home with my LDG z11 proii atu. I also have the cap hat, would difference could that make in your opinion

I love the music.

Awesome

Top notch quality video. You are a real pro. Great job!

@KB9VBRAntennas

3 ай бұрын

If you like the production quality, be sure to check out more of my Parks on the Air videos.

that was very nice. thank you for taking time to get some nice video of the park ! that was a great day for the park. the upper bands been weird hear in NY as well. 10 and 12 meters was open but some noise and QSB and DX was going south for me. South America. Brazil coming in 12 meter SSB. FT8 on 12 was mostly south and far west coast . was testing end fed half wave cut for 10/11/12 meters. I fold back end to tune. Veritable on 10 meter pole with 4 -17ft counter poise. 49:1 UNUN with 2 stack of FT 240-61 toroid's and 100 PF 3 KV cap wound with 10 AWG mag wire. handles QRO just fine. short time 500 watt FT8 no heating on ferrite. SWR 1.3 . love that remote tuner. 73's

Hey Mike, thanks for the video. When I look at the dimensions and all the pieces of this Frankentenna, it reminds me of the Rybakov, except that it’s self supporting. If you use the chameleon hybrid, which is a five to one transformer, it’s almost the same.

@KB9VBRAntennas

3 ай бұрын

Yes, this is very similar to the Rybakov. Also using the Chameleon hybrid transformer is a great idea instead of the tuner as it is closely matched to the 4:1 unun that the Rybakov utilizes.

Great video Michael. What a great result with that antenna! I was out back this evening with my Icom 705 when it clicked--I've got Chameleon's MPAS 2.0-ditch the micro hybrid transformer and just use the Icom tuner at the feedpoint! Worked really really well. Great to see your demonstration that I've got a lot of fun to look forward too! Thanks! John KF0AE 73

@KB9VBRAntennas

3 ай бұрын

Yes, you can do that. Using the broadband transformer is convenient, but using a remote tuner instead will increase performance.

fantastico

Nicely done antenna project...simple, yet effective. This antenna is suitable for both home and field use. Aloha, Russ (KH6JRM).

@KB9VBRAntennas

3 ай бұрын

Many remote tuners aren't very portable, this one is.

Very nice activation! I've been experimenting with the CHA URT1 and the CHA TDL = pretty much amazing so far!!

Roughly a Rybakov 7.6M antenna. Have often thought about trying this with the Chameleon Micro. Maybe even experimenting with the WR Sporty Forty center loaded to see if that would improve 40 meters. But thinking about it never got it done! Greet video.

@KB9VBRAntennas

3 ай бұрын

You are correct, this is setup is in effect, a Rybakov antenna. Center loading the Sporty Forty is interesting, though. I'll add that to my list of things to try.

@mickeyzee43

Ай бұрын

@@KB9VBRAntennas Had yet another thought. What if you center fed this set up? Seems like you would have a "by the book" less compromised shortened OCF vertically polarized dipole. Unused base feed point would isolate it from ground. And you might be able to bring your coax straight back to another support like a picnic shelter eliminating interaction of the antenna with the coax and as well as the "tripping point". Thus also creating a single guy point to boot.

You should have connected the "beehive" connector directly to the base of the antenna with a wire, NOT a coax. The impedance is high and will cause a lot of loss using coax. Another option is using a 4:1 or 9:1 transformer at the feed point. Radials are also needed.

Michael what is the ground plane you used? Looks different than the metal screen.

Mike: A little bit off-the-script here, but, to shorten a dipole antenna for better SWR readings is it practical to turn & twist the ends back on themselves instead of cutting as an option? Thank you.🤔

Hey Michael, newer ham here. What program are you using to log contacts on the laptop? Thank you!

@brandydarling1

3 ай бұрын

Listening

@KB9VBRAntennas

3 ай бұрын

I'm using Hamrs on a Windows PC, www.hamrs.app

How would you compare that ATU to your LDG? If you had to chose one which would it be

@KB9VBRAntennas

3 ай бұрын

That's a really good question as both serve slightly different purposes. For most portable operations a tuner by the transceiver, like the LDG Z11 ProII is sufficient as the impedance mismatch on the cable isn't that high and that tuner is a little easier to set up. But if I wanted to direct feed a non resonant wire or build a vertical without using a transformer, then the remote tuner is the way to go. The Chameleon remote tuner lets you do some really inventive stuff out in the field, so it is really fun to experiment with.

Does that chameleon tuner choke common mode current as well?

@Chameleon_Antenna

3 ай бұрын

You’ll need to put a RVI choke at the feed point if you’ve RFI problems. I put a RFI choke on ALL my antenna installations!

Very interesting! If you don't mind. Im looking at the Icom 7100 vs ft891. Im leaning toward the 7100. Any suggestions, as Im new to HF. Thanks much!!

@KB9VBRAntennas

3 ай бұрын

Good question, because both rigs are about the same age. The 7100 has the advantage of VHF/UHF and a slightly bigger display. But the control head is a separate piece, so you are always dealing with two parts. The 891 has the head integrated into the unit with the option of being removed, but no 2 meter and 70cm support. The 7100 was originally designed as a mobile transceiver, hence the separate head. I have a friend that takes his 7100 portable, he keeps it in a case and pulls the head out when he uses it. But other than that ergonomic quirk, I've used it and it is a fine rig. On a side note, Icom tried to discontinue it twice, but popular demand has kept the IC-7100 alive and they keep bringing it back.

@farmerwayne1404

3 ай бұрын

@KB9VBRAntennas Thank you very much! I did see it discontinued , and I asked them why. They told me that they couldn't get the chips or whatever components. Possibly due to the plandemic! I think Ill save for the 7100. It will be for mobile and home. Thanks much!

What type of headset you are using ? Do you use VOX oder do you have an "invisible" PTT ?

@KB9VBRAntennas

3 ай бұрын

I'm using the Heil BM-17 headset with a PTT switch. Here's a couple of videos on my headset setup: My headset trigger switch: kzread.info/dash/bejne/lGmL15p7nNW5dpM.html Heil Ham Radio BM-17 Dual headset: heilhamradio.com/product/bm-17-2/

Did the “feather flag base” need any other help supporting that vertical antenna?

@KB9VBRAntennas

3 ай бұрын

If there is no wind, the base does support the antenna. But on a previous occasion using this setup, the wind knocked over the antenna twice. So for this time, i put a sand bag on the legs to keep it stable.

Michael, great video as always, question, does your "Frankentenna" end up closely approximating Chamelion's MPAS 2.0? What do you think of that rig and is it worth the high price? Thanks, Paul Sanders KK6RXU

@KB9VBRAntennas

3 ай бұрын

This setup is a bit longer than the MPAS 2, but it does closely replicate the Rybakov non resonant vertical. All remote tuners are pricey and the Chameleon isn't priced out of line compared to similar models (it's only $40 more than the Mat 40, and it has more features). Last week's video digs deeper into the tuner: kzread.info/dash/bejne/h5armMyrcaa8hZs.html

@paulsanders1

3 ай бұрын

Thank you Michael.

What is the “ground cloth” you are using instead of radial wires? Thanks, AC5MF

@KB9VBRAntennas

3 ай бұрын

It's conductive Faraday fabric. I did a video on how it works last fall: kzread.info/dash/bejne/lYqGzbSPnLfNoJM.html

@petermichaelcapani7253

3 ай бұрын

@@KB9VBRAntennas Thanks, Michael!

I NEED YOUR ADVISE. I WANT TO USE A 18 FOOT TELESCOPIC WHIP AND USE A MFJ ANALIZER. FOR 10 METERS, DO I NEED A 4:1 OR 9:1 BALUN ? THIS WILL HAVE 4 TO 8 WIRE RADIALS ON THE GROUND PLANE .

@KB9VBRAntennas

3 ай бұрын

If you have a telescoping whip, you can adjust it to a 1/4 wave vertical. Then you won't need the unun at all. For the 10 meter band, the whip should be approximately 96 inches tall.

I'm surprised you don't have to guy wire your vertical with it being segmented and so high.

Dear Michael, thank you for this video. I am curious about this arrangement. Chameleon makes a coil that would easily (?) have given you the bands you wanted to use (I believe) and the $$$ is similar to the tuner. It is understood that your antenna knowledge is extensive, therefore my question: why choose the tuner over the coil? Thank you, KQ4IXD

@KB9VBRAntennas

3 ай бұрын

Great question. The purpose of a transformer, like the Chameleon MPAS Micro (or mini) is the change the high impedance at the feed point of the antenna to near 50 ohms, which matches the the impedance of the coax cable. You can certainly use a transformer, or Unun, in the place of a remote tuner and achieve the same effect that I'm demonstrating. But, the remote tuner may be the better choice under the following circumstances. 1st, if your feed line run is long, a remote tuner will be more efficient in your overall antenna system in that you always have a 50 ohm on the coax, which means a lower over all SWR, and lower losses due to standing waves on the coax. 2nd, with some non resonant antennas, the impedance at the feed point can be variable and the 5:1 transformer may be not sufficient and will require tuning or adjustment near the transceiver. That means either using the transceiver's built in tuner or an accessory tuner at the transmitter. A remote tuner will always give you a 50 ohm match and moving the tuner away from the transceiver increases efficiency of your feed line coax, thereby increasing performance. Remote tuners can be expensive and it may be more practical to use an unun of some sort at the feed point instead of a remote tuner. Especially if you are using a relatively short piece of coax cable (under 100 feet). Picking one sort of matching system for your antenna depends on your goals and objectives and picking one over the other may be constrained by your budget.

Hey just looking for confirmation we ran you as a park to park on 3-29 you were at US-4266 we were at US-2273 your signal was crazy strong just wondering if you were running this antenna on that activation you did mention to us that you had tuner at the base would love to know if this was the setup or something else thx. keep the video's coming 73 KE8OUO

@KB9VBRAntennas

3 ай бұрын

On the 29th I was using a different antenna, The CaHR Ares end fed random wire antenna. I put the remote tuner at the base of the antenna for the final impedance match. Last week's video had the setup in that park, fast forward to the about the 2/3 mark kzread.info/dash/bejne/h5armMyrcaa8hZs.html

@jeffmoore344

3 ай бұрын

@@KB9VBRAntennas Thanks for the quick reply you really had a crazy signal that day i had to reach up and turn the rf and the volume both down. 73

your long hair rocks...

I think Plover is pronounced to rhyme with Lover, not clover

@KB9VBRAntennas

3 ай бұрын

Not in Wisconsin, it ain't :)

@paulwilliams2080

3 ай бұрын

@@KB9VBRAntennas 🙂Fair enough. I figured it was named after the bird. But maybe not. All the best

@KB9VBRAntennas

3 ай бұрын

You made me curious so I did a little bit of sleuthing. The Plover river's headwaters are close to where I recorded the video and it flows into the Wisconsin River near Plover, Wisconsin in Portage county. The village gets it's name from the river, which the Ojibwe called: Au-puh-ki-ra-kan-e-we-se-be, meaning "river of flags." www.wisconsinhistory.org/Records/Article/CS11873

Great activation. Neat set up, but I can't understand why you would want to go to all the trouble of doing such a tall, non resonate antenna with all the wiring to the remote tuner when you could have just used the 17' Chameleon or MFJ whip for 20 meters on up. A lot of mismatch to be corrected. The 17' whip would be a resonate quarter wave and more efficient. You weren't working 40 or 80 meters. I also think a much lower cost tuner at the radio would have worked just as well. Maybe a slight difference in loss, but not enough for anyone at the other end to notice. Especially when only using a short length of coax. Remote tuners do have their place, but I don't see the use in this case being any kind of benefit. I appreciate you showing how something like this does work, but it's just too much extra work with zero advantage. Remote tuners are one of those things that a person should really think about and research before buying. They are darn expensive. Is it really necessary for what you are doing ? Will the cost be offset by any noticeable increase in signal ? In most cases, the answer is no. For less money you could buy a DX Commander portable and been way ahead in transmitted signal and receive strength. Money is tight and getting the most bang for your buck these days is important to most of us.

@KB9VBRAntennas

3 ай бұрын

I did this because it's fun to experiment and I wanted to show some of the crazy things that you can do with a remote antenna tuner. Not everything aspect about amateur radio has to be about squeezing the highest level of efficiency out of an activity. But to your point. Non resonant antennas can be quite efficient and this particular setup is based loosely on the Rybakov. wb3gck.com/2018/12/09/revisiting-the-rybakov-806-vertical/ This is a 25 foot vertical with four ground radials, with a 4:1 transformer at the feed point. The impedance match is such that a remote tuner handles it well. If I used a tuner by the transceiver, I'd need the unun, but I can do without that piece by employing the remote tuner. What's cool about the Rybakov is that being non-resonant, it exhibits some really cool lobes on the upper bands, enhancing its DX qualities. Band conditions weren't such on this activation, but prior activations using this style of antenna resulted in some pretty cool DX, including Sweden, France, Spain, and indonesia (watch last week's video for those crazy contacts). Would a 1/4 wave vertical or even a DX commander give me the same performance? Maybe. But I don't have a DX commander and making a monster vertical whip is kind of cool.

@johnkaelberer237

3 ай бұрын

@@KB9VBRAntennas I get it. It is fun to experiment and get a little crazy. We all do it with equipment we have. I just hope less experienced hams don't think that they will do better by buying a $450.00 remote antenna tuner. They won't. Too many new hams watch youtube channels, see something that looks really cool that is being gushed over and spend money that would be far better spent on gear that will not only yield better results, but cost a lot less. I'm actually glad youtube was not around when I got into ham radio. I learned from books and fellow hams what works the best and usually at a low cost. I didn't have multiple youtubers showing off the latest gizmo that made me think that it takes big bucks to get big results. In most cases, it doesn't. Perfect example is Walt on the Coastal Wires and Waves channel. A cheap roll of wire, push up fiberglass antenna pole, a dipole or 4 to 1 or 9 to 1 balun and the guy makes all kinds of great performing antennas. He makes contacts all over the world, both by the ocean (which really helps things) and inland when in Poland. All using a 20 watt, $450.00 radio. He uses the G-90 radio with it's great built in tuner and built in antenna analyzer most of the time, all for the price of a remote tuner alone. You don't have to spend a lot of money to get great performance. You don't have to spend a lot of money to have many different configurations in antenna designs. You don't have to spend a lot of money to make an antenna that will set up fast and offer multiple bands. There are very few antenna designs that that actually require a remote tuner. I don't mean to pile on you. There are youtubers far worse when it comes to pimping radio gear. A lot of what you post is good information and is helpful to all ham radio operators. I just hate seeing new hams with very expensive piles of shiny radio gear that works no better than lower cost items or buying things they don't need at all. You're into this one antenna for over $600.00 (or would have been if you didn't get the tuner for free). Hey, if you really need a remote tuner, buy one. Look around, there are other good ones out there, the Chameleon is not the only player. Check out "Mark the Ham Florida Man" youtube channel. Ham Radio Myth-A Remote Antenna Tuner is Superior

Drop the music please!

Cool video. Thanks for sharing.

Michael what is the ground plane you used? Looks different than the metal screen.

@KB9VBRAntennas

2 ай бұрын

I use a fabric called Faraday cloth. It's a conductive fabric material that's primarily used for making electromagnetic resistant bags and containers. But it is conductive so it works great as a ground network. Here's the cloth: amzn.to/3RTjDv7