Every
few months a thread starts somewhere on the 'Net - demeaning Arrow
Antennas for whatever reason. Or the "Elk vs. Arrow"
silliness - where one will tell all that one or the other is vastly
superior to the other ...
There's
plenty of "Elk vs. Arrow" debate on the `Net. A lot
of it pure rubbish - and not written by people who have actually
purchased and own both units as they make their uneducated allegations.
A couple of the re-occurring themes ...
"Arrow
doesn't publish gain numbers for their antennas."
This
is true. Maybe a little "arrogant" of Arrow, too (grin).
But reliable test data is out there - and thousands of owners
will attest that their Arrow Antennas are performing magnificently
for what they were designed to do.
"The
Arrow is hard to transport."
Well,
I devote my entire Ford Ranger's covered pickup bed to my Arrow
when I take it places. Rarely has it been disassembled. But
to make it absolutely flat, all one needs to do is unscrew the
three 2M element pairs, and you have a flat plane of an antenna.
"Arrows
are all engineered wrong - they cannot possibly work."
A
little story for you. While working for HRO-Anaheim a few years
ago, I sold an Arrow to a client for working the satellites.
I had first-hand experiences with the Arrow, and therefore could
wholeheartedly recommend them to others. The gentleman was waiting
for me to open up the shop the next morning, with his Arrow
in hand.
"I
know antenna theory, and this antenna cannot possibly work -
it is engineered all wrong - I want a refund!" - he demanded.
Hmmm.
Part of me wanted to discover if he assembled it correctly,
and whether or not he actually tested it. But the other part
of me was thinking, "Well, I can purchase it myself as
an open-box item ... "
Which
I did. And it is the SAME antenna that I have used the past
6+ years for EVERY demo and presentation I have given.
Moral
of the story: The Arrow Antenna may not please some engineers.
But it sure pleases those who desire to work the FM satellites.
"The
Arrow Antenna is much heavier ... "
I
have brand-new, un-opened Elk and brand-new, un-opened Arrow
in my hands. The Elk package weighs 35.6 ounces. The Arrow weight
33.6 ounces. Any "weight difference issue" is, well,
NOT an issue.
And
on and on ... EITHER antenna is a great investment. Most of the
anti-Arrow nonsense on the `Net remind me of while my wife was
proudly carrying her Nikon F in the 1970s (arguably the most significant
SLR in 35mm history), others would comment, "Oh, my Pentax
/ Minolta / Canon is as good as that ... " --- But you never
heard any Nikon owner state any such comparison ... (grin)
How
do the Elk and Arrow compare? Both work the FM birds very well.
Either make working the FM sats feel like "cheating"
- the gain is that dramatic over any HT whip improvements you
might make.
But
from someone who has purchased both and has used them both, the
Arrow "senses" the initial capturing of a sat's signal
more definitively than the Elk does. I mean, in front of darned
near every audience, I'll declare, "There it is!" -
when those close to me don't hear anything of note. But that slight
"dip" in the background noise ... no SWR meter can detect
it ... you can just hear the beginning of capturing the signal
better with the Arrow than with the Elk. This is NOT a scientific
conclusion - just my personal observation after working the sats
for several years with both antennas. **
And
although it takes more patience and finesse to work with "lesser"
antennas, remember this: One of the first 2M reception reports
from the 250mW transmitter aboard the new ARISSat-1 satellite
was from a gentleman using a STOCK DUCK on his Yaesu VX-8 HT!
SO ... simple HT antenna improvements (Smiley 270A ... Diamond
SHR-320A) are certainly viable options!
Antenna
suggestions - and DIY projects - on the ANTENNAS page at ...
http://www.work-sat.com
Clint
Bradford - K6LCS
(**Editor's
Note: I have experienced this phenomenon myself! This really
does happen.)
Update
17JUN12
