Hello Marconi,
Yes it seems the antenna is rare.
I have done a "active" search. (including placing ads etc.) for a couple years.
Asking around on the "HAM-international" forum etc etc.
All that didnt work.
This one came from a basement from a Radio shop.
The guy retired and "forgot" about it...
He also had a couple hygain bigguns / astroplanes etc.
I collect "old famous" antennas and am quite happy with this Big Mac.
After the pictures its going back in the box and leave it...
One reason why they are rather rare, is the mechanical aspect.
If you have a "slight" breeze..you get worried if it will brake hihi.
Anyway ill read the thread again and try to collect what u need.
Hang on, first a couple other things to do.
Kind regards,
Henry
Thanks Henry.
What I need is every dimensions necessary for a close to accurate model, and for sure the correct dimensions for the two coils and the three tuning wires, (diameter, height, width, spacing, and overall wire length if possible).
The spacings for the hubs around the tuner element areas.
Diameters and exposed lengths for all wires, including the two insulators dimensions.
Maybe you can give me an idea for the offset and the bend in the tuning elements, length and diameter. As an example of these dimensions for the bottom and the top of the tuner, you might suggest something like the following:
the tuner wires offset is 1" from the radiator, and the middle of the tuners are 10" inches offset, and the wires are 108" x .375". And if possible, the space between the two hubs that hold the wires is an important dimension too.
I'm also curious if the bottom of the radiator is adjustable or fixed inside the insulator, or did they design the bottom insulator that way in order to get a foot or so of tubing down there to take much of the stress...instead of a raised insulator, like is at the top.
Henry, you if anybody on these forums, knowing full well how to model, should know what I am asking for and what I need without going back an seeing if I left some specific details. Earlier, I didn't do anything but ask for the dimesions.
Henry, I think we both know that taking down all the dimensions for an antenna is far more difficult that one might imagine. So, if you feel this is too much work to get me the information, then don't worry about it, I'll understand.
At first I thought the Big Mack might be something special, but after I reconsidered that idea and seeing how it models, I don't think this antenna will show anything specials in performance, just like my opinion for my Wolf .64 has changed after modeling it. Of course dimension error can make a difference, but I see similar patterns with both the BM and the Wolf.
The Wolf is a good working antenna, but it is surely not a collinear and comes no where near performing like a collinear. I believe Bob hit it right when he compared his Big Mack to his Vector Hybrid, the Big Mack may have a slight edge in performance, but they both don't fly were well in windy areas.
Earlier I convinced myself that both these antenna designs suggested they possessed the necessary elements to work like a collinear, but I have reconsidered...
neither will come close.
I think, at best, they both will probably respond about like Bob experienced with his Big Mack some years ago, and that result was nothing specials.
I don't believe either the Big Mack or the Wolf .64, will ever show true collinear type results...like I see with the Big Hair collinear 5/8 wave model I made recently. IMO, there just isn't enough apparent advantage over a 5/8 wave to be correctly classified as a collinear for any of these three antennas. The Big Hair is the only one that really shows a collinear advantage in gain.
On the other hand I also see some limitations in the pattern with the Big Hair too, the maximum gain lobe is way too narrow to really be effective in 11 meters, where line of sight and sky reflection often work together to produce good performance. So, I'm not sure the 3db gain that a collinear design is supposed to produce...is worth all the hoop la it is given, particularly working 11 meters.
I know you're busy, so do what you think best regarding sharing the Big Mack dimensions, what I requested of you will take a bit of effort and time, and for me to get anything less than complete dimensions would be a waste of my time too, I've already tried plugging in some random numbers and the results are not there.
