CQ 270 CW SSB Gang! - Cool Kids Sip from the Hour Glass?

Greetings 2m and 70cm fanatics!

I have been looking at a potential lightweight antenna build idea and stumbled upon this article about an Hour Glass Antenna for 2m (you can also make one for 70cm and, I think, 23cm).

I was wondering if anyone had used one out on the CW battlefield? How did you get on? Any joy with it?

I’m looking at the design to see if you could make it collapsible, or more portable and lighter too. Just an idea is all so thought to ask the experts here for your ideas. All welcome. :smiling_face:

#270CWLife :love_you_gesture::partying_face:

1 Like

Not sure what Brad Turner from M.A.S.K is doing in your post but I appreciate the walk down memory lane to my childhood times - hi.

https://mask.fandom.com/wiki/Brad_Turner

And some flashy 80’th cartoon sounds

Btw. this series is probably why I am an Engineer now. I have build all the M.A.S.K convertable vehicles in Lego fully functional when I was between 9 and 11 years old… :nerd_face:
And it was not “Technic Lego” - just a basic multipurpose parts collection with some joints and rotation parts.

From my point of view: Monoband Slim-J or a Moxon like that one if you want some directional gain for 2m and 70cm…

73 Joe

2 Likes

“2/70 CW Crusaders! On summits worldwide…all the time!” :love_you_gesture::grin::guitar:

The M.A.S.K. theme should play on every hike up to a summit or drive to a park!

I’m definitely considering building that hour glass and trying a test run in a park to see how it goes.

2 Likes

Here’s an improvised 2m version for Field Day, using diamond loops.

A general discussion of various double loops is here:
https://practicalantennas.com/designs/loops/double-loops/

2 Likes

That looks mega! The branches across the middle make it even better! :ok_hand:

1 Like

You can’t tell from the photo, but antenna itself is just the wire and cross-pieces, and it hangs from the top (although I needed some sort of weight to hold down the bottom - maybe I taped it to the mast? That certainly makes it more portable.

I just built it from a reasonable guess of dimensions, and they never worked anyone on it. But then, they were having trouble working anyone on FM from that site, and I suspect there was a lot more activity available there than on SSB or CW.

While the 50 ohm double delta does have the highest gain of the various types of double loops, it also has a relatively narrow SWR bandwidth, which means that a portable version may be more prone to detuning if it isn’t sturdy enough. (Notice the small wire stubs he added for fine-tuning the antenna - would they get knocked about in a portable version?) My 10m model has a 2 : 1 SWR bandwidth of less than 400 kHz. It’s also 9m tall, and the bottom element should be at half the height of the top element to get the benefit of the second delta loop. By contrast, a version designed for 200 ohms (using a 4 : 1 balun) is 75% wider, has about 1.2 dB lower gain, but covers 1 MHz of the 10m band at 1.5 : 1 SWR: that is going to be less prone to detuning due to minor variations in setup, etc. And, because it is 2m shorter than the 50 ohm version, I don’t need to get it up as high to get the benefit of the second element.

You can get the same gain by stacking two standard quad loops one above the other and feeding them in phase. That’s 35% wider than the double delta, but much more tolerant of construction, and has about the same gain. With a bit of creativity we can size the loops to give 100 ohms at each feedpoint, so the two connected in parallel have a 50 ohm feedpoint. A 10m model has 1500 kHz of bandwidth at 2 : 1 SWR - that gives you an idea of how much more tolerant it will be of detuning. Then a fold-up version is much simpler.

Not that I’m likely to actually try one of these out on HF, even 10m, except perhaps for a very special occasion. Yes, we have trees on some summits where I can get the top up 18m, and I might get a rope up that high with a couple of tries. But a single 50 ohm rectangular loop is only 2 dB down from the double delta when the tops are at 18m, it is much more convenient in that I can also use it more effectively at more practical heights, and it has about double the SWR bandwidth.

2 Likes

So, of course, if I’m going to suggest an alternative approach, I should come with a more explicit design…

Here is a model - I haven’t built it yet. But hopefully it is close enough that someone can try it out fairly easily.

We’ll start with two rectangular loops using 1mm wire (AWG #18 or BWG #19 for those who prefer). Each loop is 600mm tall and 526mm wide, fed in the short side. I’d probably pass the horizontal wires through pieces of polyethylene (“polythene?”) tubing. Because the vertical sides are longer than the horizontal ones, you can just give the loop a half twist and lay the two pieces of tubing side-by-side to collapse it for transport.

Then you need a support to hold the two loops apart, about 600mm apart. That gives a total length of 1.8m, plus a bit for a handle, mounting, etc. Ideally the antenna would be mounted with the bottom about 2m above the ground. Both loops are mounted with the feedpoint towards the center, and fed in phase. You can hang the whole antenna from a rope tied to the top if you add some additional ropes between the elements to take the tension off the feeders. Or arrange some sort of clips to attach the horizontal spreaders to the side of your telescoping mast.

The exact spacing between the too loops isn’t critical, either. Wider spacing gives a bit more gain, but makes the structure more unwieldy.

Hmmm… isn’t the feed line matching going to be a problem?

Well, each loop is crafted to have a feedpoint impedance of 100 ohms. (If you measure them individually, expect something like 110 ohms with resonance at 142.5 MHz - I had to adjust for mutual coupling between them.) So all we need to do is to run 100 ohm feedline from each loop to a common point, connect the two in parallel, and we get a 50 ohm load for coax. (A 1 : 1 balun wouldn’t be a bad idea at that point, but it may still work without one.)

Oh, don’t happen to have any RG-62 or other 100 ohm feedline handy? No problem. Take two pieces of 50 ohm coax the same length, solder the shields together at each end, and use the center conductors as a 100 ohm balanced line. Actually, in this case, cut 4 pieces, all the same length: the actual length isn’t important, as long as the completed assembly reaches between the two loops, but the feed to each loop must be the same length.

The result? About 5 dB over a dipole. SWR is 1.043 at 144.25 MHz rising to 1.33 at 146 MHz.

Not quite as narrow as the original, but about the same gain, the loops fold up easily, and it isn’t as prone to detuning.

2 Likes

@VK1DA and @VK1AD have been testing 2m hourglass antennas for use during the 2026 SOTA 2m/70cm SSB/CW challenge.

I knocked one together yesterday, using what was at hand. The antenna showed no movement on the FT817 SWR meter when set up on my 6 m pole in the backyard. The total wire length is about 414 cm. I’ll tune the antenna for 144.2 MHz using a VNA later this week.

The construction varies from John K4ERO’s version, in that it has a shallow inverted vee at the top, and, unintentionally, a vee at the bottom as well. My end game is to mount the SO239 on the plastic box with the clip-on ferrite inside and bring the two wires in horizontally along the spreader.

The element is 26 AWG hookup wire.

I made contact with Glenn @VK3YY when he was at VK3/VC-028 Dingo Ridge, about 25 km away, and the performance of the hourglass was very similar to my 5 element Yagi mounted at 3m AGL.

More field testing once I have the feed arrangement sorted.

4 Likes

My 2m SSB set up at Mt Mundoonen VK2/ST-053 comparing a 4el 2m yagi to the 2m Hourglass (two stacked delta loops).

2m contacts worked on the Hourglass antenna:

Date: 09/03/2026 | Summit: VK2/ST-053 (Mt Mundoonen)

Time Callsign Band Mode Distance (km)
20:18 VK1RX 144MHz SSB 46
20:20 VK2DO 144MHz SSB 148
20:21 VK1DO 144MHz SSB 68
20:35 VK2TP 144MHz SSB 255
20:44 VK3VG 144MHz SSB 372
20:49 VK1JA 144MHz SSB 66
20:53 VK1DA 144MHz SSB 54
20:55 VK1DJA 144MHz SSB 52
20:56 VK1DAY 144MHz SSB 38
21:03 VK1KW 144MHz SSB 42
21:06 VK2PET 144MHz SSB 21
21:15 VK3SQ 144MHz SSB 305

Aircraft scatter propagation contacts (AE) were: VK3VG, VK2TP and VK3SQ.

Andrew VK1AD

4 Likes

…thanks Andrew for your report and comparison observations. Great to work you too. :+1:

Geoff vk3sq

PS, great photos

3 Likes

Peter,

Notice you are using those clip on ferrites, did you specifically choose a particular ferrite or just go with a bog standard piece? I have a few from unknown sources, always wondered if they would be useful at HF.

Also, the two diamonds are skinny, is there anything to be gained (no pun intended) by a wider horizontal arm, so that the shapes become more square?

1 Like

Antenna gain increases with greater spacing between the top and bottom wires, which would argue for a tall, skinny antenna. But that has a lower feedpoint impedance / radiation resistance / more current in the wire, which increases the losses due to wire resistance. The optimum combination for maximum gain depends on the wire size. Using larger diameter conductors (like aluminum tubing) for the cross pieces at the ends will improve the efficiency somewhat, but also require slightly longer vertical wires for resonance.

There is also a particular geometry that gives a good match to 50 ohms, while lower impedances (skinner loops) may have higher gain, but require some impedance matching. So there are a lot of trade-offs.

The article I linked to previously (in the post with the photo of the diamond loop antenna) shows several different shapes of double loops and how the impedance changes with geometry.

2 Likes

Hi Paul

The choice of ferrites, like everything else with this antenna, is what was at hand at the time. I dislike clip-on ferrites as they often don’t close fully and leave a small gap between the two halves, which, for my way of thinking, greatly reduces their effectiveness.

When I do some more testing, I’ll remove the ferrites and see what difference it makes.

I have no real answer for this. Mechanically, a wider horizontal would be heavier and have more wind resistance and this would discourage use on a light duty pole.

My main reason for looking at this type of antenna is to reduced weight when hiking up the summits and get similar gain to a 4 or 5 element Yagi.
My current antenna: Diamond 5 element Yagi, storage tube and 3m support pole = 2.9 kg
Hourglass antenna = 0.25 kg
The support pole for the hourglass antenna is the same pole I use for my Inverted L HF antenna so there is no additional weight for the antenna support.

2 Likes