Re: Topband: 2 wl loop, worth the effort?

10 dB or more of noise ? Mein Gott ! Oh for such a quiet QTH ! 73 - Mort, G2JL _ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: 2 wl loop, worth the effort?

I apologize if I ticked anyone off; I'm just trying to help hams understand what is needed to get out. This is not directed at any one person. The topic came up and I have an opinion based on experience with what works and what doesn't. If you put up a cloud burner one or more of three things

Re: Topband: 2 wl loop, worth the effort?

I should have written "10 dB or more _additional_ noise." This is a serious problem and is on the radar of the medium wave broadcast industry as well: http://www.radioworld.com/article/afcce-symposium-examines-am-broadcast-band-woes/273098 One other typo: "101 radials, many > 50 feet" should

Re: Topband: 2 wl loop, worth the effort? (Rob Atkinson)

I put up an 1100 foot horizontal loop about 6 years ago here in Fort Collins, CO. out in the clear in my back field held up by four 70 foot utility poles spaced about 280 feet apart. Fed by about 220 feet of 450 ohm window line, back to a Palstar BT-1500A true balanced tuner. The loop wire is

Topband: 2 wl loop, worth the effort?

Hi Gary, It would make a nice receiving antenna. Let's start with a question: Would you put up a loop for 20 meters that is 6 feet off the ground? Height for horizontal antennas must always be thought of in terms of _wavelength_. There is only one effective transmitting antenna for medium

Re: Topband: 2 wl loop, worth the effort?

I should have added that in some types of weather, a dipole may have more corona (which makes noise) off the ends than a loop. I have an EZNEC model of a low loop, if someone wants it. 73, Mike www.w0btu.com On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 2:25 PM, Mike Waters wrote: > Model a low

Re: Topband: 2 wl loop, worth the effort?

You are misinterpreting the model data by looking at the shape of the pattern rather than the relative strength of the pattern at angles of interest. Example -- the so-called "take off angle" simply shows the vertical angle where the signal is the strongest. FAR more important to look at the

Re: Topband: 2 wl loop, worth the effort?

Hi Rob (and gang), I would like to make one point that should be considered in this discussion. A true vertical which is what I use (not an inverted L) on 160 meters is sometimes horrible on 160 meters for skywave that originates from close in (200 miles or less as an example). During contests

Re: Topband: 2 wl loop, worth the effort?

160m is a band for vertical polarization. www.w0btu.com/160_meters.html I am a happy user of an inverted-L hung from a tree. Those that don't have room for resonant elevated radials like mine can use K2AV's compact counterpoise, or lay as much wire on the ground as your space permits.

Re: Topband: 2 wl loop, worth the effort?

On Wed,12/2/2015 11:02 AM, Don Kirk wrote: Therefore while I don't disagree that a vertical on 160 meters is a great antenna especially for DX work, for working stations in close it sometimes can be a disadvantage. Based on modeling it looks like a dipole only 15 feet off the ground on 160

Re: Topband: 2 wl loop, worth the effort?

Forget I said all that. I looked at the model and found some possible mistakes. And I don't have any more time now to fix it. 73, Mike www.w0btu.com On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Mike Waters wrote: > > I have an EZNEC model of a low loop, if someone wants it. > > > On

Re: Topband: 2 wl loop, worth the effort?

Sent: Wednesday, December 2, 2015 12:53:39 PM Subject: Topband:  2 wl loop, worth the effort? Hi Gary, It would make a nice receiving antenna. Let's start with a question:  Would you put up a loop for 20 meters that is 6 feet off the ground?  Height for horizontal antennas must always be

Re: Topband: 2 wl loop, worth the effort?

Hi Tom, You said "Compared to a vertical, there could be 10-30 dB difference in favor of a low dipole (less than 150 ft high) within a few hundred miles.", and I was pretty much trying to make the same point but indirectly since I don't have a dipole on 160 meters. The original poster mentioned

Re: Topband: 2 wl loop, worth the effort?

Try putting a closed reflector wire under a 1 WL horizontal loop. Lay it on the ground or bury. Use insulated wire and size per typical loops…~+5% at design frequency. Experiment by listening to weak signals while opening and closing the ends of the reflector. At our latitude (64N) loops (and

Re: Topband: 2 wl loop, worth the effort?

com> on behalf of kol...@rcn.com <kol...@rcn.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 2, 2015 11:48 AM To: Rob Atkinson Cc: topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: 2 wl loop, worth the effort? Well Rob, if you read Gary's email, you will find that he is interested in communicating "...with

Re: Topband: 2 wl loop, worth the effort?

Thanks for all the replies, guess the consensus is it is not worth the effort to put up a 2wl loop over a 1wl. I know several mentioned verticals but I really was interested in the loop option. This is for QSO's with stations 500-600 miles from me, currently they report that my signal is

Re: Topband: 2 wl loop, worth the effort?

You said "Compared to a vertical, there could be 10-30 dB difference in favor of a low dipole (less than 150 ft high) within a few hundred miles.", and I was pretty much trying to make the same point but indirectly since I don't have a dipole on 160 meters. The original poster mentioned

Topband: 2 wl loop, worth the effort?

I have been contemplating a sky loop to replace my coax 160/80M fan dipole. The loop would be fed with ladder line so I could use it on 160-40M. It would take a bit more effort clearing an area to get up 2wl of wire but it could be done. Is the effort worth it over a 1wl loop? An additional