Can I use RG6 instead of RG11?

Thanks for the comment, I will be sure to check that out, 73.

Greg Lee: Agreed....it also has a much wider bandwidth.

made me feel sick

Sorry it took so long to answer your question. I had no issues with SWR. I can only assume you’ll have none as well. Good luck and 73.

66.67 FT (20.32 M) AND 47.1 FT (20.32 M)

Bxcowboy I get myself in trouble every time I turn on the power supply! Good luck.

Try to get roof access. That kicks ____! Loop antennas are great for apartments.

Got I, I'll find a way to help me with some antenna, but thanks for the return. 73 ...

its 60 feet long balcony wont do maybe a homemade slinky dipole search you tube for slinky dipole very short dipole

yes but smaller radius lower recieve thicker the better

I would not use 75 ohm since it's foil and braid shielding is not as lossy as what is needed for this antenna to work correctly. MIT original design formula was based on using lossy coax. You can use it but you will find that it will not perform any better than a standard wire dipole.

piraatje053 : Yes....you can buy or make one for any frequency. See link below for 27 Mhz. www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Double-Bazooka-Antenna-CB-Citizen-Band-Radio-11-meter-27-MHz-DXer-3/192745208464

I can't say Nick. I got nearly perfect swr over the entire band. The only thing I can say is re-check your measurements and make sure all your connections are sound. Good Luck.

ok thanks .Do you have skype I want to send you some images about my antena

OneDawkinsFan because the feedpoint is a DC shunt. It is well known that shunt fed antennas are "quieter" less noise. shunt fed antenna is safer also... all static or corona is shunted directly to ground.

I didnt hear any difference. The antenna is the same design except for use of the shield. The idea is a gimmick. no gain, no improvement.

@@GTARockman yes it is to a gain! Try working a station with QRM or atmospheric noise and you will see the difference! Just listening to the noise floor where there isn't any and you wont see the difference!

Wow, Really? Are you bored?

it is very irritating to watch an un focus video Please lear to use a CAMERA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!or take the auto focus off

Tizoc Romero*learn

@@oncueprovegas LEARN TO SPELL

Agreed, this antenna is a gimmick to sell dipole antennas.

Wrong! Not sure why you think this but it is a superior antenna! It was designed at MIT in the 1940s for radar stations! And you think they designed it as a gimmick? Lmfao! Ive run numerous types of wire antennas over the years and always come back to it! The only downside to a double bazooka is its strength and weight. The shorted stubs at the connection is usually where the biggest problems occur. But that can be over come by strengthening this connection. When band conditions are noisy ( which is most of the time ) I am always glad Ive got it on my feed line! QRM and atmospheric noises can and often cause stations to be unintelligible even with a decent signal. I have high freq hearing loss and many many times it is hard for me to understand what a station is saying even though I can see the S meter moving! Add some extra noise and it will wipe them out completely! Switch to my double bazooka and its Q5 copy! I have experimented with just about all wire antennas since getting my ticket in 1992. Everything from long wire receive antennas, long wire coax receive antennas, windoms, loops, verticles etc but even running separate receive and transmit antennas which in some cases helps I always come back to my old faithful friend double bazooka! Say what you want but Ive side by side tested it in numerous scenarios from DX, NVIS, ground wave, horizontal to inverted V and its better it most situations unless you have perfect conditions which is rare! When you need to work a specific station a lower noise floor is your friend! de WW5RM

feeatlastfeeatlast : You obviously haven't tried comparing them.....I have and the Double Bazooka has a MUCH wider bandwidth than a standard dipole, a lower noise-level and it doesn't need a balun if fed with coax. With the Bazooka design its the braid that radiates and the inner core that acts as a balun, unlike the standard dipole. I've used a standard Dipole, a Double bazooka and a Triple Bazooka and the Double bazooka easily out-performs the others. More Info. at the link below. wireantennas.co.uk/double_bazooka.html

@@GTARockman no. real Hams build their own antennas so why would this be a gimmick? Especially back in the 1940s?

Quite the contrary, I HAVE built the antenna, measured the swr carefully on 40 meters and then converted it to a standard dipole and the results are identical. You should investigate further by finding the article and analysis by a real antenna expert Walt Maxwell. August 1976 Ham Radio magazine. The MIT antenna was designed for vhf frequencies where the impedance of the coaxial sections causes it to behave completely different that the hf band antennas. But you have to have the ambition to do the research, not believe the hype and lies from people who don't understand antenna theory.

and here we soldier wires

It's all in the accent Y'all

It goes back to Middle English where the L is not pronounced but used as a modifier to the vowel for proper pronunciation.

So MIT in the 1940s was designing a gimmick for the military?

​@@WW5RM​​ MIT designing a gimmick for federal grant money???

@@MrMotorchildI was asking a question. You respond with a question. That makes sense to you? All I know is I've had numerous wire antennas and none perform as well as the DB. You might not see as much signal strength but that's by design. What matters is signal to noise ratio and that's where it shines. It's a DC shunt and the noise floor is lower. Which sometimes causes signals to be lower but with a lower noise floor you can work weaker stations and it helps reduce QRM. Added plus is increased bandwidth. I build my wire antennas myself. I dont buy anything I can build myself.