Re: Topband: Radials question
Hey Gang,
Thank you for the comments and I been re-reading them and learning.
This will be a fun late summer or early fall project.
Thanks!
Mike
n0 odk
73
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Grant Saviers <gran...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> The larger the
The larger the diameter of the antenna, the broader the bandwidth. So an
aluminum self supporting vertical that starts with 3" diameter tubing
(the HD DXE starts with 4") can have twice the intrinsic bandwidth of
16ga wire. It also gets a bit shorter for same resonance frequency. I
had a
Hi Mike, et al,
Here are my thoughts interlaced.
> Hey Topbanders,
>
> I was looking to buy or make a mono type 80 meter antenna for DXing.
>
> I was wondering couple things. If I make a full quarter wave vertical WIRE
> in tree 65 feet tall and see DX Engineering verticals claim 65 foot tall
Mike, a different question than you asked, but if you have two trees or other
supports at 65 feet or greater and more than 130ft apart, I think an 80M dipole
strung between them will be a better all around antenna than a vertical. If you
can get to 80ft or 100ft the dipole was be markedly
> was wondering couple things. If I make a full quarter wave vertical WIRE
>in tree 65 feet tall and see DX Engineering verticals claim 65 foot tall
>but wider bandwidth. What is their secret or just advertisement?
I don't know the DX Eng. product. Usually "wider bandwidth" means
flatter vswr
I mis-wrote for tired right now. The 160M Gladiator is not top loaded, it
has 4 raised radials with traps. Works great tho for me. It helped me get
two Hawaii and one Alaska for WAS and 14 DXCC in one night. Not much know
about Gladiator tho it is 1.1 antler high.
I ment the 40M mono radials it
Hey Topbanders,
I was looking to buy or make a mono type 80 meter antenna for DXing.
I was wondering couple things. If I make a full quarter wave vertical WIRE
in tree 65 feet tall and see DX Engineering verticals claim 65 foot tall
but wider bandwidth. What is their secret or just
