<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
          <<  Lancair Builders' Mail List  >>
          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>
Posted for Wclarkstill@aol.com:

Yeah Brent, we all know about the signal polarization difference of COM &
NAV
signals...and the ideal world of no scatter and perfectly perpendicular
antenna polarization you might worry.  But most belly antennas are swept
back
pretty close to 45 degrees and my W-shaped tail antenna probably has a
significant horizontal component too.  So I'll bet that a real world COM
antenna (even if the length isn't optimal) would do pretty well with a NAV
receiver.  As you say, modern receivers are very sensitive and even the
coat
hanger antenna from your old Impala would probably work.   No doubt you
could
use that too but since coat hangers don't come with RG400 and BNC
connectors,
a COM antenna should provide a simpler and adequate test for a NAV
receiver.

I've had several other IV flyers tell me the winglet setup works fine so my

concerns about signal shielding by nearby carbon must not be much of a
problem.  But I would still like to know how the carbon parts of the
winglet
effect signal-to-noise ratio and antenna directivity.  One might like all
the
signal sensitivity one could get if flying low and far from a VOR.  Wish I
were farther along in my plane so I could measure some signal strengths
with
and without the winglets in place.   But - I've more important fish to fry
right now - like getting the gear doors to work properly...Clark Still (20%

LIVP)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
LML website:   http://www.olsusa.com/Users/Mkaye/maillist.html
LML Builders' Bookstore:   http://www.buildersbooks.com/lancair

Please send your photos and drawings to marvkaye@olsusa.com.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>