Two antennas on a handheld radio

Status
Not open for further replies.

timkilbride

Member
Database Admin
Joined
Feb 9, 2006
Messages
1,905
Reaction score
65
Location
Linn Co Iowa
I saw a BNC type connector a few years back that allowed two antennas to be connected to it on one side(the top), and on the other side(bottom side) it connected to the handheld. This allowed two BNC type antennas to be connected to the scanner. Has anyone else seen one of these? I'd like to get one if I could. Hopefully I explained this clear enought.

TIA,
Tim
 

specman

Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2005
Messages
171
Reaction score
0
I saw a BNC type connector a few years back that allowed two antennas to be connected to it on one side(the top), and on the other side(bottom side) it connected to the handheld. This allowed two BNC type antennas to be connected to the scanner. Has anyone else seen one of these? I'd like to get one if I could. Hopefully I explained this clear enought.

See this thread: http://www.radioreference.com/forums/antenna-forum/113057-running-one-scanner-multiple-antennas.html

It sounds like you might be talking about a simple BNC "T" fitting or a variant of it. Personally I can't see why you want to do this. There's some decent antennas out there for portable use that should negate any perceived "advantage" of running multiple antennas on your portable.
 

W6KRU

Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
3,463
Reaction score
86
Location
Vista, CA
Tim, what are you trying to achieve? I'll bet there is a better answer than running 2 antennas.
 

timkilbride

Member
Database Admin
Joined
Feb 9, 2006
Messages
1,905
Reaction score
65
Location
Linn Co Iowa
Tim, what are you trying to achieve? I'll bet there is a better answer than running 2 antennas.


I'm going on a trip via train. The public safety agencys I want to monitor through Nebraska run on everything from lo-band to 800mhz. I have a diamond antenna that does really well on VHF, UHF, and 800. If I could add another antenna, I would add a lo-band.

Tim K.
 

W6KRU

Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
3,463
Reaction score
86
Location
Vista, CA
IMO you will probably degrade the performance of your diamond by adding a lo-band antenna. If you are using the RH-77, that is probably the best you can do. Maybe someone else will have an idea for you.

Your question is similar to the one of the stickys at the top of the page. You can read through that thread for explanations of the problems caused when hooking multiple antennas to your scanner.
 

W6KRU

Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
3,463
Reaction score
86
Location
Vista, CA
I think your biggest problem with lo-band will be hearing signals inside a big metal box with any kind of antenna. Lo-band doesn't penetrate as well as higher frequencies. Try to stay near as big of window as you can find on the train.
 

specman

Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2005
Messages
171
Reaction score
0
What you are suggesting will degrade performance severely. Your RH-77 will likely provide the best performance possible under the conditions you describe.
 

737mech

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 14, 2006
Messages
2,568
Reaction score
628
Location
Clark County, NV.
two one one handheld

I saw a BNC type connector a few years back that allowed two antennas to be connected to it on one side(the top), and on the other side(bottom side) it connected to the handheld. This allowed two BNC type antennas to be connected to the scanner. Has anyone else seen one of these? I'd like to get one if I could. Hopefully I explained this clear enought.

TIA,
Tim

Here's the thread

http://www.radioreference.com/forums/antenna-forum/119372-trying-new-stuff.html

And as stated by njay "random configuration = random results." I tried it and had fun with it. 90 bnc to bnc tee RS 800 down, RH77 UP.
 

Turbo68

Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
880
Reaction score
46
Location
East Devonport,Tasmania,Australia
I think it might work if u have 2 antennas with different band specs otherwise it might degrade the signal.

Regards Lino.

ALINCO-DJX2000
AOR-3000/AOR-3000A/AOR-8200MK3
GRE-PSR500
ICOM-R3/ICOM-RX7/ICOM-R20/ICOM-PCR1000/ICOM-PCR1500/ICOM-PCR2500
REALISTIC-PRO2035
UNIDEN-245/UNIDEN-396/UNIDEN-780
YAESU-VX7R/YAESU-FT8800R/YAESU-VR500
 

vagrant

ker-muhj-uhn
Joined
Nov 19, 2005
Messages
3,692
Reaction score
2,654
Location
California
As previously noted, the biggest concern is getting any antenna near a window, when in a metal box. I personally use one of those suction cup mounts that use BNC connectors and has a 6' cord. I found a picture of one. I cannot remember where I got mine, probably Radio Shack, but I couldn't find on their web site. Obviously the cord gives you some flexibility on positioning the scanner where you want it. If you decide later to slap a BNC T connector on there and use two antennas, it'll work, plus you'll avoid stress to the mount on the scanner.

(If you've already thought of this...well it might help others.)

http://www.scannerworld.com/images/model/ant73.original.jpg
 
Last edited:

AlmostHandy

Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
382
Reaction score
0
Location
Mohave County
Is there a difference between connecting two antennas, with two separate feedlines, to a T fitting on the back of your scanner, and connecting two rubber ducky whips directly to a T fitting.

Wouldn't the latter essentially create an offset dipole design?


Try it out, if it fails, you're out the cost of a couple of connectors.


Some of the purists here would gasp in horror to the atrocity that I rigged up on my car.
I have two Archer CB antennas with magmounts, both feedlines running to a UHF T fitting, which has a UHF to RCA adapter. Half of a paired RCA cable runs to my scanner with a BNC to RCA adapter. I'm pretty sure the BNC to RCA adapter is 75 ohm. It's really ugly, but damned if it doesn't work.
 
N

N_Jay

Guest
Is there a difference between connecting two antennas, with two separate feedlines, to a T fitting on the back of your scanner, and connecting two rubber ducky whips directly to a T fitting.
Not really other then the interaction of the two elements since they would be very close.

Wouldn't the latter essentially create an offset dipole design?
No, because both elements would be connected in parallel, not to opposite poles (Center and Ground)

Try it out, if it fails, you're out the cost of a couple of connectors.
Why not put the money towards a well designed antenna instead?

Some of the purists here would gasp in horror to the atrocity that I rigged up on my car.
You probably have it named correctly!:lol:

Antennas are science not magic. Real ones rely on math.
Random ones provide random results.

I have two Archer CB antennas with magmounts, both feedlines running to a UHF T fitting, which has a UHF to RCA adapter. Half of a paired RCA cable runs to my scanner with a BNC to RCA adapter. I'm pretty sure the BNC to RCA adapter is 75 ohm. It's really ugly, but damned if it doesn't work.
Works? You sure? You measured?
or
You guessed?
 

masonb

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2007
Messages
224
Reaction score
0
Location
Canada
Its going to work like garbage if you try to pull in a 800 trunk with a UHF / VHF split.

Well, it did for me anyways
 

AlmostHandy

Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
382
Reaction score
0
Location
Mohave County
How does one work?

Well, without having a lot of fancy test equipment, save for my trusty pro97, my testing method may have been a bit unconventional.

First I tried the CB antenna, unmodified, on the scanner. Very little came in on any band without a considerable amount of static.

Next, I trimmed the Stainless Steel whip to 19". My next test with the scanner was better. The State Patrol in the 150Mhz area came in with a lot less static, but more than I wanted to listen to.

Next I unloaded the coil, by removing most of the solder with a pump, and using copper braid to clean up the rest. I unraveled the coil, 26 turns of 18 gauge wire, from the plastic bobbin it was wound on. I used my hot knife to cut a groove in the bobbin. I reconnected the center pin lug to the whip lug with one half turn of 12 gauge wire, and did not reconnect the coil to ground.

Now the state patrol comes in clear as a bell. I'm not sure how to scientifically quantify that, sorry.

Additionally, I am receiving the Seattle Simulcast, and Port of Seattle 800Mhz systems, also clear as a bell, as in no static, like in the old "pin drop" sprint commercials, as in "Wow! is that cop in my backseat?" clear.

Then I thought to myself, "Self, you should try it with that other antenna, and see if you can't pick up the air bands". So, I trimmed the other one to 24 inches, leaving a little to tune, and tried it out. SeaTac tower was there, but not as clear as my homebrew ground plane. I removed the ground connection from the base loaded coil, leaving the 22 turns between the solder lugs.

This time, I was able to receive the SeaTac Tower very clearly. It also receives the FRS/GMRS channels really well, which is nice.

Like I said prior, I have them both connected to a T fitting, and then to my scanner, when I'm in the car. One works just as well as the other, regardless of whether one or both of them are connected at the time.



I'm not sure why you're so against the idea of experimentation. It seems a little derisive to point out that "it's science and not magic". I never inferred that it was magical in any way. I have a lot of fun testing things out, and am often very surprised at how well things work, after you've said that it wouldn't. You can throw as much money as you want at your problems. I prefer to try to build it myself. If it doesn't work, I'll try something else.
 
Last edited:
N

N_Jay

Guest
I am not against "experimenting" at all.

I just believe in the scientific process, and not random attempts.

I am also VERY wary of people passing off the unmeasured results of random attempts to others as knowledge.

Your "experiments" are not much more than making simple mag mount whips.
Get them tuned right and they work great.


Like I said prior, I have them both connected to a T fitting, and then to my scanner, when I'm in the car. One works just as well as the other, regardless of whether one or both of them are connected at the time.

Maybe I am misunderstanding what you are saying, but it seems like you are saying that one or the other works as well as both?

In your testing you don't seem to have taken different bands into account at all.
 
Joined
Jan 25, 2009
Messages
89
Reaction score
0
My two pence.

If Handy is able to listen to the things he wants to better with his frankenarray than with the stock antenna then it "works". Is there a better solution, probably. It's probably a lot more money, plus he loses the "I made this" factor. No he does not have scientific documentation to prove it's effectiveness, only the fact that he can hear what he is looking to hear. It would seem that he hears it exceptionally well to his liking as well. There really isn't an equation for that.

In regards to the OP's question, try it. It could work, probably not but what the hell do you have to lose?
 

AlmostHandy

Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
382
Reaction score
0
Location
Mohave County
I am not against "experimenting" at all.

I just believe in the scientific process, and not random attempts.


Your "experiments" are not much more than making simple mag mount whips.
Get them tuned right and they work great.


What I did to my antennas wasn't a random attack with wire cutters, and I used as much science as I needed to get the job done. My goal, was to be able to monitor several bands at once(800, 150, and 120Mhz), and I have accomplished that goal with, what I consider pretty good success. I used several different antenna calculator for element and coil parameters, and I was a little hypercritical about measuring, marking, and double checking before I cut anything. What do you consider random? I had a plans going in, thanks mostly to this site and it's members. What makes you think I didn't?


Maybe I am misunderstanding what you are saying, but it seems like you are saying that one or the other works as well as both?

Yes. Both antennas work great, (as in clear, static free reception), on all of the bands that I designed them for. It does not matter if one or the other alone is connected to the scanner, or if they are both connected to the T fitting-RCA cable contraption, I get great reception in any case with these antennas.



N_Jay, when you say "unmeasured results", what do you expect me to measure my result with? What methods and equipment do I need to be able to quantify the performance of a homemade antenna? Seriously, I'm really interested in learning how I can legitimize my experimental antennas as successes or failures. Up until now, I've only been using my ears to tell the difference between a good signal and a bad signal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top