On 3/7/2016 3:11 PM, Jim Brown wrote:
The vertical
pattern of any antenna is produced by the reinforcement of the direct
wave by the first reflection from the earth. That reflection is MUCH
stronger, and is strong at a lower angle, if the "earth" at the point of
reflection is sea water. Sea wat
On Mon,3/7/2016 2:37 PM, Bill N6MW wrote:
The V7 version with 2 drooping T wires and 2 elevated radials for each
band was just okay on 160 but good on 80,
Drooping Tee wires will reduce the effective height of the antenna by a
significant fraction of their droop.
probably limited by trees p
On Mon,3/7/2016 12:37 PM, NC3Z Gary wrote:
My 160M dipole is actually a 160/80M fan and resonates well on both
bands,
For several years after I moved to W6 ten years ago, I had a loaded 160
dipole that was also resonant on 80M up at about 120 ft. Even at that
height, its a low dipole on 160M,
OK, this has me intrigued. So the T top would look like this if looking
straight up (or straight down) with the vertical portion at the xx?
x
x
x
xx
xx
xx
xx
x x
xx
x x
xx
xx
xx
xx
x
x
x
My 160M dipole is actually a 160/80M fan and resonates well on both
Good recommendations. I did a couple of things differently for my 160 T
hung to 3 trees,
I use Lewmar or Ronstan or Harken small swivel blocks, cheaper, more
durable in tough environments and the swivel helps keep lines from
tangling or twist from messing things up. Don't use 3 strand rope.
On 3/7/2016 11:05 AM, John Pescatore via Topband wrote:
It is resonant on 160, with about 16 radials out now,
so don't need a tuner there. I've tried it on other bands
with a tuner in the shack, and performance is horrible.
Could have been so much loss in the coax that a base
of the antenn
Gary,
Though our conditions are different, I also have a top height of
somewhere around 50-60'. I don't know exactly, I run a sloper over
the top of the tallest tree I can find from my radial plate. I'm at
the edge of a marsh and every hurricane takes down trees and I need
to get them up over
Gary - I've had a 51' T up for 6 or 7 years now and it is a very good transmit
antenna on 160. It is resonant on 160, with about 16 radials out now, so don't
need a tuner there. I've tried it on other bands with a tuner in the shack, and
performance is horrible. On most bands, it heard/talked wo
Hi Gary,
The antenna you describe should work quite well on both bands, but I'll
suggest a couple of tweaks to make the matching easier. First, make it a
Tee -- if you have a catenary, you can support a Tee as easily as an L.
Second, make the top section a fan (like a fan dipole) with short
7;s eight-foot
tall 40-meter vertical wearing a very large top hat.
73,
Charles, W2SH
> From: n...@outlook.com
> To: topband@contesting.com
> Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 15:28:08 +
> Subject: Re: Topband: Low band antenna project questions
>
> That is the highest I can get s
That is the highest I can get support for. I am in far eastern NC and
right on the sound where we get hurricanes and nor'easters so I am not
putting up the towers I had at the old QTH.
Gary Mitchelson
NC3Z/4 Pamlico County, NC FM15
On 07-Mar-16 09:49, Robert Harmon wrote:
> Gary,
> Are you res
Gary,
Are you restricted to 50 feet high max ?
Bob
K6UJ
On 3/7/16 5:50 AM, NC3Z Gary wrote:
OK, still working on my permanent low band antenna and what I can fit
for an effective antenna. The space I have is a recently cleared forest
area. I had originally considered a full size loop but the be
Gary,
I have an inverted L similar to this setup and it does a decent job on 160
through 20 meters.
I put up an inverted L supported in trees because it fit he backyard layout. It
is 5/16 long with a 50-55 foot vertical component.
I have 30 radials 70 feet long and 4 130 foot radials because t
13 matches
Mail list logo
