Re: Topband: low inv-vee

[HP]

I was going to stay out of this low inv vee antenna - probably should - but 
here goes. 

The short remark is I believe N6RK comments are true - its a top loaded 
vertical 
with a little inv vee thrown in . 

The long story is below - read at your own riisk. 

In about 9 years I am at 126 countries cfmed on 160 - have worked virtually 
everything I can hear 
and of course thats the other shoe - living in a noise pit in Phoenix , AZ. . 
Highlight was working 
FT5ZM one call on the third morning - I could hear him for about 3 minutes on 
the greyline . 
Most guys around here would hear him for 30 min or so . Thats the anecdotal BS 
. 

A few years ago I participated in a RBN test with 3 other guys - one was one 
element of the N5IA 8 circle 
before the array was up , 126 foot tower with 64 radials , another was 90 foot 
25 G top loaded shunt fed 
and 130 radials full length , (that one was spotted in EU during the the test ) 
,one was a full size vertical 
above a 40 gfoot high feed point with 32 elevated sloping 132 feet radials - I 
dont have full details on the 
other but it was a competitive single tower station. We all ran 1 kw input to 
the system , spaced by 1 khz 
and sent cq for several minutes . The outcome was my antenna was down about 9 
dB from a good antenna. 
It was interesting and not totally unexpected however that close in at 100 to 
500 miles or so I was down 
far less and quite variable . I was blown away with a VK4 6 dB RBN return last 
August when I was experimenting . 

N6RK I think has it nailed - at least certainly in my case. My antenna is an 80 
meter inv vee with apex at 39 
feet - runs NE/SW from SW corner of the house roof to a shed at NE corner of 
lot - just makes it . 
Ends are about 9 feet high . It hangs from the side of 40 feet of 25G with ten 
feet of mast out top with a 
KT34 at 42 feet and a 40M1L rotatable dipole at 50 feet I spaced the feedline 
to the inv vee out 
about a foot from the tower .. The KT34 and 40M21L feedline and rotor lines are 
taped to legs inside the 
tower. I have a reasonably fair EZNEC model that duplicates what I measure vs 
freq with a VNA2180 
very close on 80 and by selecting a loss resistance for the half inch 
conductior simulating the coax shield 
attached to the NE side of inv vee on 160 and the TL model for 42 feet of RG213 
which comes down 
to a remote antenna swutch about 5 feet up the tower . I have pretty good 
chokes on the rotor / antenna 
swutch and common coax to shack but honestly once the coax is tied to the tower 
- those chokes make 
very little difference. As Rich says however there is a HUGE difference in what 
I measure on 160 
if I put a choke with 5 2.4 inch #31 core 6 passes before the inv vee feedline 
attaches to the switch . 
And RBN testing although hard to be conclusive since it takes too long to make 
the change looks like the 
antnenna is down about 3 to 4 dB because the curent in the vertical (coax 
shield) goes way down . 

OK now what does EZNEC say is going on in the wires ? 
At 1500 watts into the system , the current going into the SW side (which is 
connected to the inner 
condutcor of the feedline is 3.83 amps at -15.5 degrees ) , the current into 
the SW side connected to the shield is 
1.87 amps at -30.2 deg . The current in the tower is about 360 ma max and 
actually has a dip down to about 
30 ma near the inv vee feedpoint . The current inwire 4 which represents the 
shield fo the coax tied to 
the NE side of the inv vee is 6.44 amps at -22.3 degrees and at its base its 
5.87 amps at -20.3 degrees 
Ihave yto put 20 ohms loss resistance at thebotton m of that wire to get the 
measured resistance to agrees withmeasured - 
the reactive part agrees very closely - j 37.23 measured versus - j 36.73 ohms 
- the 20 ohms loss resistance gets the real 
parts to 5.82 measured vs 5.84 calculated. That does not give me any heartburn 
as the tower which is the real "ground" 
only has a couple 8 foot ground rods driven in near the base and connected at 
base. 

Some day I think I will hang a folded "counterpoise" or two at the switch and 
see if I can tell if I drive down the loss - 
I also have the capability fo attaching "extenders " on each side to get a 
resonnce at about 1870 - its easier on the tuner 
but not enough different to tell if its better or worse than just hanging 3000 
pfd at shack wall onthe 80m inv vee and 
doing a touch up tuning in the tuner Just works out handy 

BTW I have worked 160 WAS in a weekend in contests and just started playing 
with FT8 seriously and have worked 41 states 
in an about a month - had 3 more from last year for 44 so now as you would 
expect - need to finish up the 
far NE ME/DE/NH/RI and NE and SD out here . 

73 Hank K7HP 

_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: low inv-vee

[Wes Stewart]

Could be. An effective balun on 160 isn't trivial, but then the questions are at 
least twofold. 1) How ineffective is it and what are the relative currents on 
the intended radiator compared to the incidental radiator and 2)  what 
constitutes the ground plane?  On my cactus patch I'm working my tail off to get 
an effective ground plane laid down under my "real" inverted L.  I would be 
saddened to know that 120 feet of Heliax laying on the ground from the antenna 
to the shack would be all I need. :-)


Wes  N7WS

On 3/28/2018 6:24 PM, Richard (Rick) Karlquist wrote:

One thing about an inverted vee on 160 that can
confusing:  if you don't go to a lot of trouble to
have a really effective balun, you end up having
feedline radiation.  In the case, you really have
an inverted L.  This is related to articles written
about so called "loop skywires" where they say:
do NOT use a balun.  That's because they are really
counting on the feedline to be the vertical radiator
on 160 meters and the loop is just top loading.

Therefore, low inverted vee "success stories" may
not mean what you think they mean.

Rick N6RK
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband



_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: low inv-vee

[Wes Stewart]

We live in two countries separated by a common language.

In the states, we consider any wire in a "v" shape suspended upside down to 
be...wait for it... an inverted vee, regardless of height as far as I know.


Are you suggesting that in Merrie Olde England there is a specified angle 
between legs that define a "v"?


Wes  N7WS

On 3/28/2018 2:23 PM, Roger Kennedy wrote:

...You'd have to have the centre at
least 100ft high for it to be an inverted vee.

Roger G3YRO
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband



_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: low inv-vee

[Mark K3MSB]

I don't think so.  In my Electromagnetic Fields and Waves class in EE
school (way back when dinosaurs just stopped roaming the earth and
Constellations still graced the skies...) the prof derived the equation for
a received signal.  The polarization terms disappeared after the first
ionospheric bounce.

73 Mark K3MSB


On Wed, Mar 28, 2018, 9:03 PM Steve Maki  wrote:

> Interesting. Some say that on 160 vertical polarization rules, while on
> 80, horizontal polarization rules (or at least *often* rules). Of course
> polarization and angle of arrival are two different things...
>
> -Steve K8LX
>
> On 03/28/18 17:23 PM, Roger Kennedy wrote:
>
> > Well I've said it before and I'll doubtless say it again . . .
> >
> > In my experience, most DX propagation on 160m ISN'T low angle  (unlike
> 80m
> > when it nearly always IS.)
> >
> > For the past 45 years, at several different QTHs I've always used a
> > horizontal co-ax fed halfwave dipole, only 50ft high . . . I'm sure most
> > people would agree I put a respectable DX signal.  I've regularly worked
> all
> > over the world on Top band, and I've never had trouble getting through
> > pile-ups to work Dx-peditions.
> >
> > Plus a dipole at 40 feet will never really be an inverted vee ! (just a
> > horizontal antenna with drooping ends) - You'd have to have the centre at
> > least 100ft high for it to be an inverted vee.
> >
> > Roger G3YRO
>
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: low inv-vee

[Guy Olinger K2AV]

 Amen.  73, Guy K2AV

On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 9:24 PM, Richard (Rick) Karlquist <
rich...@karlquist.com> wrote:

> One thing about an inverted vee on 160 that can
> confusing:  if you don't go to a lot of trouble to
> have a really effective balun, you end up having
> feedline radiation.  In the case, you really have
> an inverted L.  This is related to articles written
> about so called "loop skywires" where they say:
> do NOT use a balun.  That's because they are really
> counting on the feedline to be the vertical radiator
> on 160 meters and the loop is just top loading.
>
> Therefore, low inverted vee "success stories" may
> not mean what you think they mean.
>
> Rick N6RK
>
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: low inv-vee

[Richard (Rick) Karlquist]

One thing about an inverted vee on 160 that can
confusing:  if you don't go to a lot of trouble to
have a really effective balun, you end up having
feedline radiation.  In the case, you really have
an inverted L.  This is related to articles written
about so called "loop skywires" where they say:
do NOT use a balun.  That's because they are really
counting on the feedline to be the vertical radiator
on 160 meters and the loop is just top loading.

Therefore, low inverted vee "success stories" may
not mean what you think they mean.

Rick N6RK
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: Wednesday 160m DX Activity Night

[Brad Rehm]

Roger,

A big front went through central Texas today, leaving us with 20-40 dB over
S9 QRN.  Parts of the area got 12 cm of rain, and the front extended all
the way up to VE3-land.  As always, we needed the rain, but let's hope for
better condx next week.

73,
Brad  KV5V

On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 6:23 PM, vk2wf  wrote:

> Hi PaulInteresting!It would seem that one's location makes a big
> difference.Last night I managed AA1K, K1CP and W6ENZ.But on the previous
> night on Tuesday, nothing.73Adrian VK2WF
>
>
>
> Sent from my SAMSUNG Galaxy S7 on the Telstra Mobile Network
>  Original message From: VK3HJ <
> vk3hj_l...@barefoothorse.com.au> Date: 29/3/18  10:08 am  (GMT+10:00) To:
> topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: Wednesday 160m DX Activity
> Night
> Wednesday night was positively awful from VK3. I called CQ for nearly an
> hour and gave up with no calls, and only local RBN reporting.
>
> By contrast, Tuesday night was quite good to NA, with a number of USA and a
> handful of Canadian stations, and one Japanese station calling!
>
> 73,
>
> Luke VK3HJ
>
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: XM240 Hi-Q coils

[John Harden, D.M.D.]

Interesting guys. I have had up a full size Telrex monobander (2 el) since 
1995. It has 66 ft full size elements on a 14 foot boom. It has been a killer 
since it went up. One of the best investments I have ever made. It is 6 ft 
above an M2 rotary for 80/75 at 112 ft.

73,

John, W4NU
K4JAG 1959 to 1998

Sent from my iPhone

> On Mar 28, 2018, at 8:29 PM, Steve Babcock  wrote:
> 
> Hi Bill,
> (If you don't mind, I have shared this to the reflector since I have rx’d 
> other similar questions)
> 
> I have lately been using 4NEC2 (free and very good program: 
> http://www.qsl.net/4nec2/  )
> My model is not a “standalone” 40m yagi, but includes the 80m Yagi on the 
> same boom. (the 40m Yagi shares the boom with the 80m Yagi)
> 
> However, I would suggest you build you own model anyway and play with the 
> Reflector tuning and observe the F/B, gain, impedance and BW. It is very 
> informative. You will also realize that when the peak F/B approaches the 
> resonance point the BW will get real narrow. Also, you will see that when the 
> reflector is tuned that short, the Yagi will actually reverse direction below 
> the FB peak since the reflector begins to act like a director. Thats why you 
> need bandswitching.
> 
> The most important thing about building your own model is you can then 
> determine the resonant point of the reflector when the driver is isolated. In 
> the model, insert about 1e6 ohms load at the driver element, and then do a 
> sweep and measure the resonance. Then, when you build the Yagi on the tower, 
> isolate the driver (just open it up) and use your analyzer to tune the 
> reflector for resonance at the measured qrg as per the model results. Then 
> tune the driver and include the necessary matching network based on the 
> impedance data gained from the model.
> 
> go here to my webpage…everything is explained for the coil build here:
> http://www.qsl.net/ve6wz/CC_coil.html 
> 
> For detail on general coil construction and the tuning methods I used, see 
> what I did with the 80m Yagi here:
> http://www.qsl.net/ve6wz/intro.htm 
> 
> 73, de steve ve6wz
> 
> 
>> On Mar 28, 2018, at 4:25 PM, Bill Cotter  wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Steve,
>> 
>> I was intrigued with your note below on improving the XM240 antenna. I have 
>> an older Cushcraft 40-CD that I would like to improve the F/B and possibly 
>> the gain, but I only care about a bandwidth between 7000-7050kHz.
>> 
>> I would like to know how you designed and built the Hi-Q coils to replace 
>> the stock coils. And, if you would share your design dimensions for maximum 
>> F/B, or the model file so I can recreate it down in the bottom CW segment. 
>> For tools, I have YO, AO and EZnec modeling software, plus a rig expert 
>> analyzer.
>> 
>> I love this lightweight antenna and want to take it to the next step. BTW: I 
>> have toyed with the idea of building a W6NL Moxon for 40M, but I'll do that 
>> from scratch with more substantial materials. Getting this 40-CD back up is 
>> my short term goal.
>> 
>> Thanks in advance,
>> 
>> 73 Bill N4LG
>> 
>> 
>> At 12:27 AM 3/28/2018, you wrote:
>>> The large BW and 50 ohm feed point of the XM240 is partly due to the 
>>> loading coils, but mostly because of the reflector element tuning.
>>> With any Yagi, as the max FB QRG gets closer to the minimum SWR qrg 
>>> (resonance), the BW will crash. Cushcraft designed this Yagi to provide an 
>>> easy match and a big BW, but sacrificed both gain and FB. Specifically, if 
>>> the reflector is tuned for max FB at or above the design min SWR frequency 
>>> the bandwidth will be very narrow. This is because the elements are very 
>>> tightly coupled. Also, the feed point impedance will be very low.
>>> The XM-240 has the reflector tuned much below the design centre SWR min 
>>> frequency. In other words, if you shortened the reflector element of the 
>>> XM-240, (but left the driver unchanged) the SWR would be very high because 
>>> the impedance would be much below 50 ohms and the bandwidth would be very 
>>> narrow, but the FB and gain would be improved.
>>> 
>>> I rebuilt my XM-240 with hi q coils, but I also shortened the reflector to 
>>> maximize gain and FB based on NEC modelling. I require a helical hairpin to 
>>> match to 50ohms, since the feed point impedance is around 25 ohms. The 
>>> bandwidth is so narrow I have built band-switch boxes at each element, each 
>>> with 4 relays to add inductance to cover all of 40 m. This is the same 
>>> system used on my coil loaded short 2el 80m Yagi.
>>> The XM240 is s proven performer even with the lossy coils, and like any 
>>> commercial product, simplicity and universal appeal (broad bandwidth) will 
>>> always lead to a compromise.
>>> 
>>> De Steve Ve6wz.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> From Babcocks iPhone
>>> 
 On Mar 27, 2018, at 7:25 PM,   wrote:
 

Re: Topband: low inv-vee

[Steve Maki]

Interesting. Some say that on 160 vertical polarization rules, while on 
80, horizontal polarization rules (or at least *often* rules). Of course 
polarization and angle of arrival are two different things...


-Steve K8LX

On 03/28/18 17:23 PM, Roger Kennedy wrote:


Well I've said it before and I'll doubtless say it again . . .

In my experience, most DX propagation on 160m ISN'T low angle  (unlike 80m
when it nearly always IS.)

For the past 45 years, at several different QTHs I've always used a
horizontal co-ax fed halfwave dipole, only 50ft high . . . I'm sure most
people would agree I put a respectable DX signal.  I've regularly worked all
over the world on Top band, and I've never had trouble getting through
pile-ups to work Dx-peditions.

Plus a dipole at 40 feet will never really be an inverted vee ! (just a
horizontal antenna with drooping ends) - You'd have to have the centre at
least 100ft high for it to be an inverted vee.

Roger G3YRO


_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: XM240 Hi-Q coils

[Steve Babcock]

Hi Bill,
(If you don't mind, I have shared this to the reflector since I have rx’d other 
similar questions)

I have lately been using 4NEC2 (free and very good program: 
http://www.qsl.net/4nec2/  )
My model is not a “standalone” 40m yagi, but includes the 80m Yagi on the same 
boom. (the 40m Yagi shares the boom with the 80m Yagi)

However, I would suggest you build you own model anyway and play with the 
Reflector tuning and observe the F/B, gain, impedance and BW. It is very 
informative. You will also realize that when the peak F/B approaches the 
resonance point the BW will get real narrow. Also, you will see that when the 
reflector is tuned that short, the Yagi will actually reverse direction below 
the FB peak since the reflector begins to act like a director. Thats why you 
need bandswitching.

The most important thing about building your own model is you can then 
determine the resonant point of the reflector when the driver is isolated. In 
the model, insert about 1e6 ohms load at the driver element, and then do a 
sweep and measure the resonance. Then, when you build the Yagi on the tower, 
isolate the driver (just open it up) and use your analyzer to tune the 
reflector for resonance at the measured qrg as per the model results. Then tune 
the driver and include the necessary matching network based on the impedance 
data gained from the model.

go here to my webpage…everything is explained for the coil build here:
http://www.qsl.net/ve6wz/CC_coil.html 

For detail on general coil construction and the tuning methods I used, see what 
I did with the 80m Yagi here:
http://www.qsl.net/ve6wz/intro.htm 

73, de steve ve6wz


On Mar 28, 2018, at 4:25 PM, Bill Cotter  wrote:
> 
> Hi Steve,
> 
> I was intrigued with your note below on improving the XM240 antenna. I have 
> an older Cushcraft 40-CD that I would like to improve the F/B and possibly 
> the gain, but I only care about a bandwidth between 7000-7050kHz.
> 
> I would like to know how you designed and built the Hi-Q coils to replace the 
> stock coils. And, if you would share your design dimensions for maximum F/B, 
> or the model file so I can recreate it down in the bottom CW segment. For 
> tools, I have YO, AO and EZnec modeling software, plus a rig expert analyzer.
> 
> I love this lightweight antenna and want to take it to the next step. BTW: I 
> have toyed with the idea of building a W6NL Moxon for 40M, but I'll do that 
> from scratch with more substantial materials. Getting this 40-CD back up is 
> my short term goal.
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> 
> 73 Bill N4LG
> 
> 
> At 12:27 AM 3/28/2018, you wrote:
>> The large BW and 50 ohm feed point of the XM240 is partly due to the loading 
>> coils, but mostly because of the reflector element tuning.
>> With any Yagi, as the max FB QRG gets closer to the minimum SWR qrg 
>> (resonance), the BW will crash. Cushcraft designed this Yagi to provide an 
>> easy match and a big BW, but sacrificed both gain and FB. Specifically, if 
>> the reflector is tuned for max FB at or above the design min SWR frequency 
>> the bandwidth will be very narrow. This is because the elements are very 
>> tightly coupled. Also, the feed point impedance will be very low.
>> The XM-240 has the reflector tuned much below the design centre SWR min 
>> frequency. In other words, if you shortened the reflector element of the 
>> XM-240, (but left the driver unchanged) the SWR would be very high because 
>> the impedance would be much below 50 ohms and the bandwidth would be very 
>> narrow, but the FB and gain would be improved.
>> 
>> I rebuilt my XM-240 with hi q coils, but I also shortened the reflector to 
>> maximize gain and FB based on NEC modelling. I require a helical hairpin to 
>> match to 50ohms, since the feed point impedance is around 25 ohms. The 
>> bandwidth is so narrow I have built band-switch boxes at each element, each 
>> with 4 relays to add inductance to cover all of 40 m. This is the same 
>> system used on my coil loaded short 2el 80m Yagi.
>> The XM240 is s proven performer even with the lossy coils, and like any 
>> commercial product, simplicity and universal appeal (broad bandwidth) will 
>> always lead to a compromise.
>> 
>> De Steve Ve6wz.
>> 
>> 
>> From Babcocks iPhone
>> 
>> > On Mar 27, 2018, at 7:25 PM,   wrote:
>> >
>> > I should have said lossy loading coils may contribute to this exceptional
>> > bandwidth.
>> >
>> > John KK9A
>> >
>> > -Original Message-
>> > From: j...@kk9a.com [mailto:j...@kk9a.com]
>> > Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2018 01:24
>> > To: 'towert...@contesting.com'
>> > Subject: re: [TowerTalk] XM240 SWR plots
>> >
>> > Lossy traps may contribute to this exceptional bandwidth.
>> >
>> > John KK9A
>> >
>> > W7ZZ wrote:
>> >
>> > The XM240 will have an SWR of 2:1 or less over either the CW or SSB portion
>> > of the 

Re: Topband: Wednesday 160m DX Activity Night

[VK3HJ]

Wednesday night was positively awful from VK3. I called CQ for nearly an 
hour and gave up with no calls, and only local RBN reporting.


By contrast, Tuesday night was quite good to NA, with a number of USA and a 
handful of Canadian stations, and one Japanese station calling!


73,

Luke VK3HJ 


_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: Wednesday 160m DX Activity Night

[Roger Kennedy]

Well, I'm not sure if it has been poor conditions, or a just a lack of
activity . . . 

But I've not heard many North American stations on the band lately.

Hopefully we'll have some activity tonight !

I'll be on as usual (about 1.828) from around Z . . . there's usually
other Europeans on too.

Hope to see you on the band !

73 Roger G3YRO

_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: low inv-vee

[Roger Kennedy]

Well I've said it before and I'll doubtless say it again . . . 

In my experience, most DX propagation on 160m ISN'T low angle  (unlike 80m
when it nearly always IS.)

For the past 45 years, at several different QTHs I've always used a
horizontal co-ax fed halfwave dipole, only 50ft high . . . I'm sure most
people would agree I put a respectable DX signal.  I've regularly worked all
over the world on Top band, and I've never had trouble getting through
pile-ups to work Dx-peditions.

Plus a dipole at 40 feet will never really be an inverted vee ! (just a
horizontal antenna with drooping ends) - You'd have to have the centre at
least 100ft high for it to be an inverted vee.

Roger G3YRO
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: low inv-vee

[Brian Campbell]

"So are the others (Brian?) talking about a true coax-fed 160m
inverted-vee?  If so, I'm interested!

Jeff  VE3CV"



No, Jeff.


I feed it with ~320' of Ladderline to a 4:1 Balun and then around another 150' 
- 200' of RG213 to the shack.


I am on a hill here with sloping terrain to EU and most of NA ( as per HFTA 
analysis ) and it works gangbusters on all bands - even with LP - as I do not 
have an amp so I am stuck with 100 watts - which is enough or me :-)


However YMMV


Brian

VE3MGY




From: Topband <topband-boun...@contesting.com> on behalf of Jeff Wilson via 
Topband <topband@contesting.com>
Sent: March 28, 2018 3:31 PM
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: low inv-vee

I have always used an 80m inverted-vee (66.6 ft per side) with apex at
50ft at top of a yagi-free tower attached to a steel workshop and fed
with 450 ohm ladder line and shorted at the tuner in the shack to work
as a top loaded vertical (35ft is actually vertical, rest of the
feedline mostly hortizonal 3ft above a steel roof!

Just worked JA8EAT with 100W on March 12 at 1040Z (thanks Yaz for LOTW
confim and number 131 QSLd on topband...138 worked in 10 years).  No
160m amp hereyet.   Use 16 radials (100-130ft) and temporary winter
600ft Beverages and 200ft Bogs for RX.  Helps being on a hill in the
country as well.  I always feel loud in the ARRL contests to the West
Coast and KH6, but usually have to wait past 0300Z to work any EU even
though I hear them at my sunset.

So are the others (Brian?) talking about a true coax-fed 160m
inverted-vee?  If so, I'm interested!

Jeff  VE3CV


On 3/28/2018 12:00 PM, topband-requ...@contesting.com wrote:
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 19:26:41 +
> From: Brian Campbell <ve3...@hotmail.ca>
> To: Carl Luetzelschwab <carlluetzelsch...@gmail.com>,
>"topband@contesting.com"<topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: low inv-vee
> Message-ID:
>
> <cy4pr12mb18627341f91e72b246d5c847ff...@cy4pr12mb1862.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> I put up a 1/2 wave Inverted V ( each leg is about 140' ) for 160M in January 
> of this year just so I could do inband SO2R in the CQ160 CW contest. It has 
> its apex at 40' and the ends are at 5'. I would have been very happy to just 
> work any East coast stations during the contest but I found that I was being 
> called by stations from as far away as California down into the Caribbean and 
> everything in between.
>
>
> This morning I worked Luke ( VK3HJ ) on my Inverted L here at 1110z ( SR-5 
> min ) and we exchanged Q5 reports - nothing unusual. Then at  SR he 
> disappeared into the noise. Again nothing unusual. After a java refill I came 
> back into the shack and could hear NA stations calling and working him but he 
> was still NIL - not even a single ping could be heard on the Inverted L. Just 
> for fun I switched over to the Inverted V and there he was  539 to 549 - a 
> real booming signal almost as loud as when we worked earlier when I gave him 
> a 559 on the Inverted L. Now it was SR+28 min so when there was no one coming 
> back to his CQ's I called and I almost fell out of my chair when he came back 
> to me. No we didn't make the QSO as he didn't get my full call but the fact 
> that he heard anything is amazing. Had I been running more than 100 watts I 
> have no doubt we could have finished the QSO.
>
>
> So the Inverted V definitely stays up.
>
>
> Carl I am a believer :-)
>
>
> 73,
>
> Brian
>
> VE3MGY
>
>


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
[https://static3.avast.com/20180328/web/i/mkt/share/avast-logo.png]<https://www.avast.com/antivirus>

Avast | Download Free Antivirus for PC, Mac & 
Android<https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
www.avast.com
Protect your devices with the best free antivirus on the market. Download Avast 
antivirus and anti-spyware protection for your PC, Mac and Android.




_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: low inv-vee

[Jeff Wilson via Topband]

I have always used an 80m inverted-vee (66.6 ft per side) with apex at 
50ft at top of a yagi-free tower attached to a steel workshop and fed 
with 450 ohm ladder line and shorted at the tuner in the shack to work 
as a top loaded vertical (35ft is actually vertical, rest of the 
feedline mostly hortizonal 3ft above a steel roof!


Just worked JA8EAT with 100W on March 12 at 1040Z (thanks Yaz for LOTW 
confim and number 131 QSLd on topband...138 worked in 10 years).  No 
160m amp hereyet.   Use 16 radials (100-130ft) and temporary winter 
600ft Beverages and 200ft Bogs for RX.  Helps being on a hill in the 
country as well.  I always feel loud in the ARRL contests to the West 
Coast and KH6, but usually have to wait past 0300Z to work any EU even 
though I hear them at my sunset.


So are the others (Brian?) talking about a true coax-fed 160m 
inverted-vee?  If so, I'm interested!


Jeff  VE3CV


On 3/28/2018 12:00 PM, topband-requ...@contesting.com wrote:

Message: 4
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 19:26:41 +
From: Brian Campbell 
To: Carl Luetzelschwab ,
"topband@contesting.com"  
Subject: Re: Topband: low inv-vee
Message-ID:



Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

I put up a 1/2 wave Inverted V ( each leg is about 140' ) for 160M in January 
of this year just so I could do inband SO2R in the CQ160 CW contest. It has its 
apex at 40' and the ends are at 5'. I would have been very happy to just work 
any East coast stations during the contest but I found that I was being called 
by stations from as far away as California down into the Caribbean and 
everything in between.


This morning I worked Luke ( VK3HJ ) on my Inverted L here at 1110z ( SR-5 min 
) and we exchanged Q5 reports - nothing unusual. Then at  SR he disappeared 
into the noise. Again nothing unusual. After a java refill I came back into the 
shack and could hear NA stations calling and working him but he was still NIL - 
not even a single ping could be heard on the Inverted L. Just for fun I 
switched over to the Inverted V and there he was  539 to 549 - a real booming 
signal almost as loud as when we worked earlier when I gave him a 559 on the 
Inverted L. Now it was SR+28 min so when there was no one coming back to his 
CQ's I called and I almost fell out of my chair when he came back to me. No we 
didn't make the QSO as he didn't get my full call but the fact that he heard 
anything is amazing. Had I been running more than 100 watts I have no doubt we 
could have finished the QSO.


So the Inverted V definitely stays up.


Carl I am a believer :-)


73,

Brian

VE3MGY





---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband