Now that it's been out and in use for a few years, any new thoughts on the NWE-34 antenna, aka The Dominator?
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
The Dominator
- Thread starter ZebraRadio
- Start date
Thanks, Michi. I will contact him.
One thing to watch for with the NWE-34 is snow and ice buildup at the base of the "cone".....frozen precip can collect
here and create high SWR. If the antenna is mounted high enough to be safe - and practical for coverage, it's nearly impossible
to remove the ice "blob' that forms here......
The earliest iterations of the Dominator had almost no gap between the center pin of the "N" (or DIN) connector and ground.
I used Coax-Seal -- or even Flex-Seal (!) to minimize a potential ice "short" during heavy winter storms here in the Northeast.
Weather issues aside, the NWE-34 performs well......one real advantage is the minimum wind load it presents.....the company rates it
to withstand 100 mph wind (it doesn't say how the antenna should be supported to accommodate this....!),; I've had 2 units survive 70 mph
winds when mounted on a 5 foot tripod and bolted to the roof of a cape-style home. Neither antenna was damaged in any way!
BTW.....the very latest versions of the Dominator have increased space around the connector's center pin.
Maybe the manufacturer (in Italy!!) heard my rantings.....!
here and create high SWR. If the antenna is mounted high enough to be safe - and practical for coverage, it's nearly impossible
to remove the ice "blob' that forms here......
The earliest iterations of the Dominator had almost no gap between the center pin of the "N" (or DIN) connector and ground.
I used Coax-Seal -- or even Flex-Seal (!) to minimize a potential ice "short" during heavy winter storms here in the Northeast.
Weather issues aside, the NWE-34 performs well......one real advantage is the minimum wind load it presents.....the company rates it
to withstand 100 mph wind (it doesn't say how the antenna should be supported to accommodate this....!),; I've had 2 units survive 70 mph
winds when mounted on a 5 foot tripod and bolted to the roof of a cape-style home. Neither antenna was damaged in any way!
BTW.....the very latest versions of the Dominator have increased space around the connector's center pin.
Maybe the manufacturer (in Italy!!) heard my rantings.....!
Where I am, there is no snow (well, hardly ever). But there is rain. I'm curious as to the performance of the NWE-34, particularly at heights that are well below 30m. Is it on par with a dipole, the same or is it better?One thing to watch for with the NWE-34 is snow and ice buildup at the base of the "cone".....frozen precip can collect
here and create high SWR. If the antenna is mounted high enough to be safe - and practical for coverage, it's nearly impossible
to remove the ice "blob' that forms here......
The earliest iterations of the Dominator had almost no gap between the center pin of the "N" (or DIN) connector and ground.
I used Coax-Seal -- or even Flex-Seal (!) to minimize a potential ice "short" during heavy winter storms here in the Northeast.
Weather issues aside, the NWE-34 performs well......one real advantage is the minimum wind load it presents.....the company rates it
to withstand 100 mph wind (it doesn't say how the antenna should be supported to accommodate this....!),; I've had 2 units survive 70 mph
winds when mounted on a 5 foot tripod and bolted to the roof of a cape-style home. Neither antenna was damaged in any way!
BTW.....the very latest versions of the Dominator have increased space around the connector's center pin.
Maybe the manufacturer (in Italy!!) heard my rantings.....!
Here is another decent antenna that might work for you it is cheaper than the Dominator
www.aareff.com
5/8 Wave 2KW Vertical High Gain FM Broadcasting Antenna
Our 5/8 antenna is the best value for money antenna you will buy for your FM transmitter system anywhere in the world. It has fantastic RF gain, strength, durability, high power, operation in any climate, and easy installation.
www.aareff.com
Re: the AAREFF 5/8.......Don't waste your $$!!
I bought one about a year ago.....I waited more than 4 MONTHS for delivery......and was disappointed with what I received.....
The unit is made of thin-wall aluminum tubing....the specs seem to indicate the "export" model of this antenna uses smaller diameter tubing than
the "non-export' model. The base of the unit is strong, but I would be hard-pressed to try to push 2 kw of 100 MHz RF through this thing!!
I've tested it with about 200 watts using a Nicom NT-250. With proper "tweaking" I was able to get the SWR down to ~1.07:1 -- not too shabby....
But, for my bucks, I'll go with the Dominator...a heftier antenna all around.....
I bought one about a year ago.....I waited more than 4 MONTHS for delivery......and was disappointed with what I received.....
The unit is made of thin-wall aluminum tubing....the specs seem to indicate the "export" model of this antenna uses smaller diameter tubing than
the "non-export' model. The base of the unit is strong, but I would be hard-pressed to try to push 2 kw of 100 MHz RF through this thing!!
I've tested it with about 200 watts using a Nicom NT-250. With proper "tweaking" I was able to get the SWR down to ~1.07:1 -- not too shabby....
But, for my bucks, I'll go with the Dominator...a heftier antenna all around.....
I would be kind of skittish buying something critical for my station from the Dominican Republic. The next military coup, the next major earthquake and the company disappears.
AAREFF appears to have "offices" in Florida, England and the DR.....although it looks like the actual manufacturing is done in the DR.
Over the past several years I've purchased products from AAREFF that I was VERY satisfied with --- transmitters, amplifiers and exciters.
The 5/8 antenna, for me, turned out to be a big "thumbs-down"!!
Over the past several years I've purchased products from AAREFF that I was VERY satisfied with --- transmitters, amplifiers and exciters.
The 5/8 antenna, for me, turned out to be a big "thumbs-down"!!
I would suggest using a circular pol (CP) antenna such as one of the many slant-vee dipole. Many FM receive antennas are randomly polarized and CP will result in the lowest polarization mismatch loss. Easy to get 20-30 dB polarization loss if both Tx and Rx antennas are linear polarized and become cross-polarized. The FCC usually allow equal power for both vertical and horizontal planes.
No offices, just a phone number, at least when stuff was last purchased from them several years ago.... and everything was shipped out of the DR using DHL.
theyve been around for... 15-20 years
Good morning folks, thanks for inviting me to join your site! To answer your question directly Zebra, yes it is better. As a matter of fact, it smokes a dipole. A dipole can’t even compete. Don’t waste your money on an Aareff 5/8. They are junk. They will take 1Kw sure, but can’t radiate above 100w effectively. There’s just not enough metal to accommodate the electrons.
The NWE-34 is the best antenna I’ve ever used. But, Big but, I ordered and paid for one through the Norwalk site and never received it. No response from the site owners either. So…. I built my own. I know, seems a daunting task however, having 30+ years of experience with RF and a few images of the antenna it wasn’t too hard to reproduce the magic. Ice won’t be a problem if you’re putting power to it. Wind load is high but, with proper construction and mounting, wind should not be a problem. As far as being under 30 meters, mine is mounted at about 65’. Meaning the bottom of the antenna is above 65’ approximately. I highly recommend this antenna. The use of the Gamma match decouples the antenna leaving it at DC ground potential as well as providing spot on SWR. I enjoy an absolute 1:1 match with mine.
What this antenna does is utilize both positive and negative phases of the AC nature of RF providing absolute penetration of obstacles in densely populated areas.
I’ll be happy to walk anyone through construction as Norwalk retains no patent. Any one knows you must modify your patent every 4 years to retain it. And you cannot improve on perfection. Which is what The NWE-34 is.
The Beat
Banned
We started with a Dominator at WRTH in Greenville. Yes, great antenna, especially in our case. However, once we bought a higher power transmitter we switched to a CP Nicom BKG-77 and, no doubt about it. regardless the dipole, a CP is always going to be better, especially as we have some hills in our area. It improved our signal dramaticaly. We now have the dominator in storage as a backup we intend on building. PS: Remember, the Dominator is a tuned antenna. When we moved to the wideband Nicom, we now have the assurance that, if our frequency is encroached upon by a full power and we have to change frequency, we won't have to pay $2000 to rent a crane to remove the antenna, tune and reinstall. Just a simple frequency change on the transmitter.
I agree. My comment is for stations running 1Kw or less.
The Beat
Banned
Just got this. With Progressive at the wheel, I bet we get a good CP antenna now. Big fan of PC here.
|
I bought my first low pass filter from PC about a hundred years ago.
Excellent product line.
Excellent product line.
It appears that Progressive Concepts, who bought out Norwalk Electronics, is phasing out the 250 watt version of the NWE-34 and focusing on the 1 kW and 3 kW versions. I wonder which one would offer better coverage with a limited antenna height? A folded dipole or the NWE-34? My CP specifies a height of radiation center above ground of 14 meters.
AAREFF is a UK company, they were previously known as Veronica and sold transmitters to "questionable" broadcasters. Many years ago before the convenience of things like Bluetooth, I used to have a very low powered unit (<50mW) from them to send music round the house on 87.7 and had to tell them when ordering that I would be using it outside the UK.
The online list of customers includes mainly stations in developing countries, unlicensed stations, a UK station which sounds distorted and terrible (BCB 106.6) and another UK station (94.3 in London) which lost its license for a variety of technical shortcomings:
Customer Photos
www.aareff.com