SteveShannon

Fixed it for you.

Antennas are funny things. I completely agree with @tweiss3 that what you're suggesting with running a ground wire wouldn't be the same as a ground plane. He's absolutely correct. But I'm not 100% certain that your bike rack wouldn't satisfy the need for a ground plane. There are many ways to satisfy the need, with a counterpoise, radials, or a sheet of RF conductive material. I would at least try it if you already have the parts. If you don't have the parts already then I would go with what's tried and true, which is what he suggested. But understand that I am a ham and I like trying different things with antennas even if they waste many hours.

Two weeks ago I discovered that my RTS software corrupts memory when using the features that RTS built into the software. I was editing a DMR codeplug and I used the built-in editing functions to edit the order of channels. To its credit, when the corruption cause the editor to throw an error it offered to send in the stack dump. The next day I received an email that basically said they could see what I did that caused the error: I used the functionality in the editor. I truly appreciate the responsiveness of their customer support. I like their editors (I have six of them) when they work, but I lost a lot of confidence in using their editors for DMR.

One caution about hiring “handymen”, be sure they are licensed, bonded, and insured so that in the event of an accident they or their estate don’t sue you.

Is that 1200 feet above the users of the repeater? How close are they? Commercial antennas are frequently phased arrays of folded dipoles. A coax feedline leads to a phasing harness. By manipulating the harness the pattern can be aimed downward to give better coverage. Our 2 meter and 70 centimeter repeaters have such antennas. They are attached to a tower that is erected at an old forest service lookout site on a mountain about 4400 feet (actual elevation 9700’ MSL) above our city, which is about 5300’ MSL. The downward tilt provided by phasing gets us great coverage.

It’s also really important to realize that 2:1 isn’t really terrible. The power still goes out the antenna. In fact you might not even be able to tell the difference between an antenna with 2:1 versus 1.0:1 SWR.

Good luck!

It might not stick magnetically, but it certainly will capacitively couple. All that’s required for a capacitor is two conductors separated by a dielectric material and aluminum is a very good conductor. Stick-on steel disks are available to attach magnetic mount antenna mounts to aluminum bodies.

Here’s what the FCC says:

All they really need to do is increase the diameter of the ground plane adapter to the same diameter as the antenna at its base.

That’s completely wrong. To calculate ERP you take the RF power input to the antenna and apply the gain.

I don’t know what the elements are made from. If they’re stainless, soldering becomes more difficult, but StaBrite solder works well for stainless. If they’re aluminum you won’t be able to solder them with normal techniques but you could crimp on an extension. I would scour the aluminum surfaces and apply penetrox to the surfaces.

Your investment isn’t a total waste. Although I haven’t tried that antenna I know of forum members who have and got decent results. Do you have an antenna analyzer so you can sweep it? And disregard negative comments from 381. For some reason that’s what he does more often than not.

Mobile, but it certainly could be used for base if you give it a mount with a ground plane. The MXTA26 comes without a base.

Midland mxta26.

On the first one, did you check the SWR before you cut it? Was SWR higher or lower? It looks like you have two different versions of the antenna.

Define “worth the price”. It’s truly a subjective question. Good antennas can really make a difference, but most of the better manufacturers already include a pretty decent antenna. I like having extra batteries but I don’t have headsets and hand mics for all of them. Having extra batteries makes a “rapid charger” less necessary. Your comparison to firearms is a reasonable analogy.

I don’t know anything about hate or controversy over squelch. Now, politics is a different matter. But let’s just see if we can get you back to hearing repeaters first and then transmitting to them. I already posted with a suggestion to change squelch mode to Tone, rather than TSQL. In that mode your receiver will let everything through. I like to work methodically through different things to rule them out. Once you hear the traffic on the repeater just fine then we can tackle transmitting. Now if you’re concerned about carrier squelch, that could also interrupt listening and there are some deeper settings in some software defined radios that affect carrier squelch. But actually activating repeaters comes down to two things: transmitting on the correct frequency and transmitting the necessary code or tone so the repeater doesn’t disregard your call. Of course this assumes you’re within range.

A long run of lossy coax will always result in lower SWR measured at the radio. The choice of radio should have very little effect on the actual SWR. Some SWR meters won’t detect reflected power well at low power levels. Or maybe it’s just a well tuned antenna.

What changed? Or more to the point, what did you change? Squelch settings on your radio will have no effect on activating repeaters, but could prevent you from hearing the repeater. So I would suggest changing squelch mode to Tone, and definitely not TSQL, first. That way you can hear the repeater as long as you are on the right frequency. Then just listen to verify that you hear the repeaters when others activate them.

Sometimes RF from an antenna lower to the ground doesn’t have to struggle to get through as much foliage as when the antenna is raised to the same level as the thickest leaves.

Yes, it’s frequently done. You’ll need an adapter to go from the connector on the radio (SMA usually) to the cable for the antenna which will almost certainly be a PL-259 connector. SO-239 is the female connector that mates with a PL-259.

Did you bolt them together somehow to reduce movement of the joints?

The antenna might be a problem, but 100 feet of rg58 is a worse problem at uhf frequencies. Less than a tenth of your power ever makes it to the antenna.

That 6 db difference is true for 100 feet of LMR400 compared to 100 feet of RG8x, but for any other distances the losses must be scaled up or down according to the distance. For instance, at 200 feet, the losses through LMR400 will be about 6 db (3/4 of the power is attenuated), but the losses through RG8x will amount to 18 db, meaning only 1/64 of the RF power reaches the antenna; 63/64 is attenuated. Putting that into ERP values with a 6 db antenna and 50 watt output radio, 12.5 watts makes it through the LMR 400 to the feedpoint. Then the antenna adds 6 db gain so the ERP is 50 watts. For the RG8x, 50/64 watt makes it to the antenna (0.78125 watts) and the ERP is 3.125 watts.