PERFORMANCE COMPARISON: C-OCFD vs. OCFD

It is important to understand the relationship between the new 80m OCFD (up the hill) and the new C-OCFD (below the house in the photo).

Before installing the new OCFD, I had an 80m OCFD just south (below) of the house.

I had both OCFD antennas erected for about 2 months and made lots of tests.  The NOISE on the lower OCFD was stronger than on the upper OCFD.

Thus, we can expect that the NOISE on the new C-OCFD is also stronger than the noise on the OCFD. We will see in the following comparisons.

From the photo you notice that the OCFD is much farther away from the shack than the C-OCFD so we can expect more feedline loss. 

THAT IS NOT ACTUALLY THE CASE!

I have 69 meters of low-loss coax running from the OCFD to the shack, and 25 meters of RG-58 running from the C-OCFD to the shack.

It is basically a wash. 

The differnce is less than 0.2dB on any band.

My QTH is "Schaippach", a very tiny village about 3km north of Germenden am Main. Schaippach is located about 45km (about 27 mi.) south-east of Frankfurt... in the middle of Germany.

When making my comparisons on RECEIVE, I am challenged with two problems:

1. Except in contests, hams make long transmissions and often forget to sign a call sign.
2. I speak English & German fluently, and Spanish "if" they speak slowly; they don't.

   So, especially on 80 and 40m, I have no idea who I am listening to in at least half

   the QSOs that I monitor.  Thus, it doesn't make much sense to log them.

Page-1 of my Comparison Log (OCFD vs. C-OCFD)

Most of the time the received signals are the same on both antennas. Whenever a station is stronger on one antenna than the other, I show it in BOLD BLUE.