More on Crossed Field Antenna

Andre Kesteloot
Sat, 03 Jan 1998 22:47:18 -0500

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

We all know that our two major problems on VLF are   (a)
noise and  (b) antenna efficiency. Probably not much can be
done about noise, but any antenna efficiency improvement
would obviously be more than welcome  :-)
Hence my interest in antennas other than traditional. The
Crossed Field Antenna (CFA) designed by GM3HAT certainly
matches the definition of  "other than traditional". (see
Wireless World Dec 1990).
On 13 December 97, I wrote to Maurice Hately GM3HAT but have
not received any reply so far. (See my posting to this site
of 19 Dec, copy attached herewith).

But, surprise, on page 42 of CQ Magazine for January 1998,
in an article on antennas:

Quoting in part: "[...] Maurice C. Hately GM3HAT offers
several innovative Skyware HF antennas [...]  First is the
CFL1 Crossed Field Loop Antenna, capable of handling 200
watts RF PEP. [...] The antenna depends on the principle of
"Poynting Vector Synthesis", a complex, patented process
explained in detail in the Hately product literature. [...]
The system includes the phasing unit and cost $499 to $599
depending on feeder configuration.
Next up are the EMDR (Electromagnetic Delay Line Radiator) 1
and 2 antennas. [...] Maurice describes the EMDR as a
"developed form" of the Crossed field antenna in the form of
a slender radiating delay-line consisting of a flat,
three-wire cable of low-loss polypropylene material. Two
versions are available the EMDR 1 (28 ft long, $369) and the
EMDR 2 (51 ft long, $399).  For more information and a
detailed explanation of the operation of these unusual
antennas, contact Hately Antenna Technology, 1 Kenfield
Place, Aberdeen, AB15 7UW, Scotland, UK.
End partial quote.

My comments: in 1991, after the publication of the original
article in WW, the "letters to the Editor" evidenced
considerable skepticism about the principles behind the CFA,
as well as some of the claims by the author. This was 7
years ago, and by now, the applications and results should
be demonstrable and measurable.

My questions :
a) Has anyone in this group seen this GM3HAT literature?
b) Can anyone in this LF group bring further light on the
c) Does anyone in this group know anyone else who might have
tried either the loop or the EMDR?
d) Does GM3HAT have a listed telephone number?


André Kesteloot N4ICK

Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Return-Path: <>
Received: from ([])
          by (Post.Office MTA v3.1
          release PO203a  ID# 0-36905U39000L2S100) with ESMTP id AAA15288
          for <>; Fri, 19 Dec 1997 18:37:48 -0500
Received: from ([])
          by (Post.Office MTA v3.1
          release PO203a  ID# 0-43173U39000L2S100) with ESMTP id AAA1852
          for <>; Fri, 19 Dec 1997 18:40:58 -0500
Received: from ([])
          by (Post.Office MTA v3.1
          release PO203a  ID# 0-43172U39000L2S100) with ESMTP id AAA18495
          for <>; Fri, 19 Dec 1997 18:47:24 -0500
Received: from ([])
          by (Post.Office MTA v3.1 release PO203a 
          ID# 0-43174U117000L2S100) with ESMTP id AIF16674
          for <>; Fri, 19 Dec 1997 18:33:51 -0500
Received: from ( [])
          by (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP
	  id SAA25106 for <>; Fri, 19 Dec 1997 18:21:27 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ( [])
	by (IConNet Sendmail) with ESMTP id SAA25779;
	Fri, 19 Dec 1997 18:21:59 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 1997 18:15:28 -0500
From: Andre Kesteloot <>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.02 [en]C-DIAL  (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: LF: RE: Crossed Field Antenna
References: <>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------DCE471D3B9CF04AA52E70A0D"

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by id SAA25106


There was a fair amount of information available in the Dec 1990 Wireless=
 World article. At the time, the author also offered for sale a kit for H=
F transmissions  (for about 400 pounds sterling, as I recall).
Before building such a gizmo for 136 KHz, it might be prudent to build th=
e HF kit (or find if someone on this list has access to one), and perform=
 some field strength measurements.

I wrote last week to the author asking for additional information. Shall =
inform this group as soon as I know more about the subject.

John Rabson wrote:

> I asked its inventor if the CFA would work at 73 kHz. He said "Yes" so =
I bought a copy of the UK patent specification. This seemed to indicate t=
hat a height of 1/1000 wavelength would be  usable.

at 136 KHz, this would mean a structure of about 2 meter high only? Not b=

> Unfortunately I could not see from the description how to construct a C=
FA. As a patent specification is supposed to be enough for a person skill=
ed in the art to do so, I conclude that I am not such a person.

As I recall, there was some   _magick_  performed in the phasing unit...

Andr=E9 Kesteloot N4ICK

Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="vcard.vcf"
Content-Description: Card for Kesteloot, Andre
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="vcard.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

begin:          vcard
fn:             Andre Kesteloot
n:              Kesteloot;Andre
x-mozilla-cpt:  ;0
x-mozilla-html: TRUE
version:        2.1
end:            vcard