Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums banner

Super Stealth Hawk & SSH II 3D Antennas

220K views 416 replies 50 participants last post by  Dakota 
#1 ·
OK! Now that the transition is over with,...... I'M BORED!
______________________________________
Buzz Lightyear's often quoted catchphrase:

"To infinity ... and beyond!"
_______________________________________
It's time to start working on the UHF/VHF 'Super-Hawk' [the next generation];)

Vertical Stacked SH--> one up + one down, but where to put the balun feed points?

Option A] Center fed with a 4" gap at the 4:1 balun feed point .
Option B] Upper & lower fed using 2" feed gaps and phase lines with the 4:1 balun at the center point of the phase lines?

Feed gap:
Option A] 4" gap at center feed
Option B] 2" feed gaps using phase lines

Element leg spacing & heights will remain the same as the SH#289 design.

Leg lengths from top to bottom of the individual left element & right element:
15", 6.5", 8.5", 8.5", 6.5", 15"

All bends are approx. 85° bends

The four [top/bottom/left/right] 15" legs stick outward at approx 45°

I'm going to run a hard-test mock-up version first to see if it even works, then I'll post a sketch for the DHC's NEC gurus.

It probably will become more directional than omni/multi-directional.
 
See less See more
#2 ·
Super Hawk (two Stealth Hawk#289 antennas combined)

Built this new improved antenna to defy all that media rubbish about
"rabbit-ears won't work anymore" ;)

Well, I certainly didn't feel like messing around with just the rabbits ears, so rather than waste anymore effort disputing the rabbit-ear theory , I have used the theory of the Stealth Hawk design and built myself the world's first DTV-Rabbit antenna and it works just awsome.


So,... here's the debut of the GH&SH_hybrid VHF/UHF antenna!:cool:



Note: Each side is made of one continuous 60" strip of #10 galvanized merchant wire.

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/853/superhawk.png/
 
#4 ·
No, it's an outdoor or attic size that is a bit of a hybrid of the Hoverman&Stealth antennas.

I stated that I "didn't feel like messing around with just the rabbits ears", so I built the whole damn bunny,.. it was a 'pun' related to media's recent 'rabbit ears are obsolete' misinformative reporting;)

No, it's not rabbit ears:confused:
So,... here's the debut of the GH&SH_hybrid VHF/UHF antenna!
I said, "the world's first DTV-Rabbit antenna" because in real life, it looks like a rabbit with ears, a head, a belly and the bottom legs ;)
 
#5 ·
Hi Ota Canuck,

Did you add a reflector to it? and if yes what kind mesh or tubes etc?

Can you also give some info on the stations that you are able to get (especially VHF-hi) and their distance?

This looks interesting and I might build one as well.

cheers
 
#6 ·
obe67,

I just built these Super Hawk#473 elements yesterday afternoon to do an initial trial-test run to check out if my theory of combining two Stealth Hawk#289 antennas would work.

Yes it is doing very well on both VHF & UHF reception.

The single-bay Stealth Hawk and the classic Stealth Hawk designs of the past did not work with reflectors, but I suspect that this 2bay design just might be workable with a reflector. My goal is to build an antenna that is multi-lobed, multi-directional with a wide enough beam-width to eliminate the need for a rotor, therefore the use of reflectors were not in my planned testing.

I currently have it mounted on my shop at 20ft and I get much stronger overall reception than I did with the single-bay Stealth Hawk antenna. This thing still seems to have quite a wide beam-width, with the signal strengths coming in stronger, though I expect that this antenna will prove to be more bi-directional than multi-directional. If someone models this design, with/without reflectors, we'd probably find some need for additional frequency tuning and SWR optimization.
 
#11 ·
That Radio Shack antenna is for UHF only!

This is a combo of the basic GH antenna & the SH antenna resulting in a hybrid multi-band VHF-HI/UHF spectrum antenna.
So,... here's the debut of the GH&SH_hybrid VHF/UHF antenna!
Yeah, it's similar to that Hoverman element design, but with the Stealth Hawk #289 leg & bend-angle dimensions. The result is this Super Stealth UHF & VHF antenna with a very wide beam-width found during initial real-life test performance.

The SH design criteria is:
UHF channels 14-51,
VHF channels 7-13,
Very wide-beam bi-directional or, multi-directional, or omni-directional.
 
#14 ·
I don't know what the beam-width configuration is. This antenna has not been modeled yet.

I have done many antenna tests at my location GH,M4,4221,HBU33, etc,.. and the SH289 outperformed them all in my area. I need a very wide beam-width to cover the scattered broadcast market. The GH,M4, etc are not comparable because they are too directional compared to the SH antennas.


Super Stealth antenna vs the SH289 antenna:

From the real-tests I've done so far, I would quess that this 2bay design has very similar multi-lobe characteristics as the single bay SH antenna design, but the signal strengths are a bit stronger. It appears to be full range for VHF-Hi & UHF
 
#13 ·
Yup, I have that antenna. I re-discovered it in my basement a few weeks ago, and then when I saw the diagram of the antenna in this thread I thought - wait a minute, I've seen that before - and I unfolded it and took that picture. Do you want me to measure it? It's never been used. It still has the tag on the lead connector screw.
 
#15 ·
Please can someone mock it up and post the nec file to see it all.
Here ya go.

Code:
CM ota canucks super hawk 1
CM see http://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/showthread.php?t=144918  post count 1
CM AGT = 1.0 (.02dB) at 585 mhz, Auto Segmentation = 21
CE
GW	100	9	0	-1.5	0	0	1.5	0	0.0285341
GW	103	25	0	1.5	10.7	0	6.66355138	3.94813	0.05094856
GW	104	19	0	1.5	0	0	6.66355138	3.94813	0.05094856
GW	105	19	0	1.5	0	0	6.66355086	-3.9481315	0.05094856
GW	106	25	0	1.5	-10.7	0	6.66355086	-3.9481315	0.05094856
GW	107	43	0	1.5	10.7	0	12.2229	21.1891	0.05094856
GW	108	43	0	1.5	-10.7	0	12.222907	-21.189007	0.05094856
GW	109	25	0	-1.5	10.7	0	-6.6635512	3.94812992	0.05094856
GW	110	19	0	-1.5	-1.093e-15	0	-6.6635512	3.94812992	0.05094856
GW	111	19	0	-1.5	-1.093e-15	0	-6.6635508	-3.9481315	0.05094856
GW	112	25	0	-1.5	-10.7	0	-6.6635508	-3.9481315	0.05094856
GW	113	43	0	-1.5	10.7	0	-12.2229	21.1891	0.05094856
GW	114	43	0	-1.5	-10.7	0	-12.222907	-21.189007	0.05094856
GS	0	0	0.0254		' All in in.
GE	0
EK
LD	5	0	0	0	59000000
EX	0	100	5	0	1	0
GN	-1
FR	0	1	0	0	800	0




IIRC gain pattern is almost identical to the old style RS Hoverman here, with the gain dip at about the same place : http://www.digitalhome.ca/ota/superantenna/

The pattern is a standard figure 8 pattern, except where the gain goes below 4 and then it becomes multi-lobed. So in that aspect, youre no better off than a single SH 289.
 
#19 ·
Is it possible to tame the SWR with feed gap adjustments, eg: reduce the feed gap to 1.5".

The classic stealth hawk antenna had a 1" gap at the top end [or no gap in some models] which seemed to help with VHF gain. That top end is now being used as the feed point in this double SH design.

Other options posted here:
http://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/showpost.php?p=1313302&postcount=472
Vertical Stacked SH--> one up + one down, but where to put the balun feed points?

Option A] Center fed with a 4" gap at the 4:1 balun feed point .
Option B] Upper & lower fed using 2" feed gaps and phase lines with the 4:1 balun at the center point of the phase lines?

Feed gap:
Option A] 4" gap at center feed
Option B] 2" feed gaps using phase lines
 
#21 ·
Is it possible to tame the SWR with feed gap adjustments, eg: reduce the feed gap to 1.5".
Reducing the feed gap from 3" to 1.5" makes the uhf SWR a bit better but reduces uhf gain a bit.
For vhf-hi, its the opposite, it increases the vhf-hi swr but increases vhf-hi gain a bit.

For stacking the SH, the Winegard SD3700 300ohm to 75ohm outdoor coupler may be the ticket. With it, you could tweak out the spacing between the two and adjusting directions for sidelobes without having to worry about phasing lines.

The vhf-hi net gain, while negative, doesnt mean you wont get the very strong stations. The crappy rubber ducky antennas sold with portable TVs and some pc tuner cards also have negative net gain.
 
#22 ·
I did a simple tophat for this .



The tophat spacing is 1" from the elements. When its 1/2" apart there is lower SWR but it affected the top half of the UHF band abit more than what 1" did to the UHF . Some time tweeking would be needed to flatten out the SWR across the band . However at 195 Mhz there is a beamwidth of 84 degrees . Very impressive .



 
#23 ·
loveota,

Is this the UHF gain with or without the top-hat?

This looks pretty wild when you get to the higher UHF ranges. Maybe the legs lengths are too long. The UHF range needs to be centered a little higher to bring the drop-off a bit closer to 700Mhz.

UHF Gain:


VHF Gain:


I will attempt adding the top-hat [using 1" gap] on my test antenna tomorrow.

Centering the UHF range a bit higher:
I think the 3" center feed gap and the upper & lower element spacing gap is OK, but maybe the leg lengths should be shortened from 15", 8.5", & 6.5" to 14",8",6" to shift the UHF range up a notch to get the UHF curve centered better. I had expected that the gain would have been a bit low at ch14 and then ramp up throughout the mid range and then drop off again at ch51.

I seem to recall, with other experimental trials, that the total wire length of an integrated element effects the center of the UHF range. I believe that 56" was the magic number for centering the UHF range. Maybe I will build a new pair of elements using 1/2" shorter leg lengths @ [14" 8", 6", 6", 8", 14"] [that would be 56" total wire length per side]
 
#24 ·
Foil tape version

After seeing some of the foil tape GH builds I'm just curious if the Stealth Hawk lends itself to a foil tape version.

Don't have any toils, but I think I could handle some tape. :)
 
#25 ·
The one you posted is with the 1/2" spacing . This is the 1" spacing . I need to label those pics yet .



Without the tophats there is an issue from 590Mhz to 660Mhz where the pattern is moreso out the top and bottom rather than out the front and back . Here`s the worst case .



This needs to be corrected . Off hand I dont know what It`ll take to fix that . Once done the tophat would change aswell . Unfortuately I`m starting to re-do my roof today so time isnt there to play around with it . I`d take a good look at 300ohm`s idea of the SD3700 and do some calculations on which would give the best gain .
 
#26 ·
Testing to attempt centering the UHF range!

I haven't tried the top-hat yet, but I did make two new elements using the shorter leg lengths.

The revised leg lengths are:
14", 8", 6" [3" gap feed-point] 6", 8", 14" = 56"total wire length per element.

Initial trial results of this shorter wire length demonstrates a slight shift upward in the UHF range. I can now get WNYO49RF and I still get WUTV14RF.

There was a significant drop around channel 40 with the longer legs, and now I can get Global Toronto41RF.

Note: Global Toronto41RF and WNYO49RF have been difficult to catch from my shop location. Signals are restricted by two groups of tall pine trees.

Using NARODS:
I will try loveota's top-hat @1" gapped narod design this afternoon and I'm going to try a similar test using a 'V' shaped narod.
 
#27 ·
Narod tests!

I tried the narod idea, but it resulted in significant signal losses and flutter across the UHF band and it didn't show any improvement on VHF. CHCH 11RF and CTV 9RF actually lost some signal strength.

With the antenna made with shorter legs and no-narods, I get better UHF range and I can also actually get a signal from Global 6.1 Paris. That's the first time I've ever seen Paris 6.1 since the transition. With the shorter legs, I can also get 49.1, which is the highest RF channel available in my area right now. WQLN broadcasts on 50RF, but they are either off-the-air or on their low power backup antenna again today.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top