Re: Topband: LU5OM shortened dipole (inverted vee) doing a nice job

[w2wg]

Sent from XFINITY Connect Mobile App

-Original Message-

From: n...@comcast.net
To: k...@myfairpoint.net,rxdes...@ssvecnet.com,topband@contesting.com
Cc: 
Sent: 2017-07-25 1:31:33 PM 
Subject: Re: Topband: LU5OM shortened dipole (inverted vee) doing a nice job

Hi folks

Let me add some comments on Gary and Bruce savvy remarks.

The real question is "how many antennas you have for 160m?"

Using Manuel example, one inverted V and one vertical, for most of us, the 
answer is two, why not, two feed lines that can be switched on the band switch, 
feed with two separated coaxial lines. But what about that other 50 MHz Yagi 
with  120ft of cable, grounded only at the back of the radio, that coaxial 
shield can be feed too if you use your tuner connected to the shield, so you 
have another one, ok now it's 3.

Well the right answer is just one system, all these antennas are so close that 
all interact witch it other as just one, if you feed the Inverted V , the 
inverted V will feed the tower and the 6m cable, and vice versa. The vertical 
will never provide any low angle because the inverted V will shoot it energy to 
the sky. 

It is possible to model all these antennas on EZENEC and see the integration. 
We know that very narrow antennas on VHF can be 5 wave long or more, and the 
directors 5 wave far from the drive element does interact with the system, on 
160m one wave is 240ft (160m), it means that any wire or structure inside that 
radio is part of your unique irradiation system.

My friend N8PR lives 3 miles from me , my TX tower is 116ft high and Peter's TX 
tower is 116ft high, my signal used to be 10 db stronger than Pete and both 
using the same power. We figure out the reason. Peter used to have a 4 square 
for 80m, on the same tower, 4 x 80m dipoles with a phasing box at the center. 
Each dipole as a sloper had the lower part connected to the shield of the 
dipole, the shilled of a 1/4 wave long cable connected to the phasing box, all 
4 of them, the 1/4 wave 80m dipole leg is actually 1/8 wave long on 160m, as 
the same for the feed line, and the same for the other feed line connected on 
the same box,, when you add 1/8 on for the dipole leg, 1/8 for one feed line 
and the 1/8 form the other feed line and the 1/8 from the opposite dipole, the 
result is a 1/2 wave 160m element inside the 160m TX vertical, even with all 
isolated the integration was so strong that Peter's signal was 10m db bellow 
comparing with my TX antenna. The system was irradiating UP!! All UP. The 1/2 
wave element was working  kind of a low dipole.

We just disconnected the  80m, dipole cables from the  phasing box and we 
measured the signal again using RBN and voalahhh.!! Both signals become exactly 
the same on Peter TX on 160m and my TX on  160m.

Does not matter where are you feeding our 160m antenna, the low SWR does not 
tell you what you really have irradiating the energy. If you want to compare 
two antennas at the same place , it is necessary to fiscally remove one when 
testing the other. Most of the time it is impossible.

One solution is to detune the  second antenna at least 20db, 30 db will be 
better, but hard to achieve.

The same apply to RX antennas, when you have a RX antenna and an inverted V, 
opening the inverted V, fiscally disconnecting the wires from the coaxial cable 
at the center of the inverted V, the noise or interaction with you RX antenna 
can drop 2 or more S unit.

Using google you can find videos from N8PR and PY2XB demonstrating the noise 
reduction when the TX antenna is detuned (become non resonant on the band you 
are listening)

The answer for my question is "just one" always one system.

Regards
JC
N4IS 
 






 

-Original Message-
From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of K1FZ-Bruce
Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 11:01 AM
To: rxdes...@ssvecnet.com; Topband <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: LU5OM shortened dipole (inverted vee) doing a nice job

Good information Gary.
 
Lot  of the fun of low band DXing comes from  getting new countries, and 
finding what antenna works best.

Yes, In the transition  that takes place  at gray line time,  there is often  
high angle taking place.

As in the past, building our own radio from scratch  is not so easy, but  lets 
"have at it"  with our antennas.

73
Bruce-K1FZ
http://www.qsl.net/k1fz/beverage_antenna.html

 On Tue, 25 Jul 2017 08:21:27 -0400, "StellarCAT"  wrote:

that’s a pretty ‘general’ statement! I had a 90’ high inverted L with the bend 
supported by a tower – it was only about 50’ from a 143’ tower ... it had ~30 
100’ radials under it ... and I managed to work 100 countries in 89 consecutive 
days - from Arizona! That included some pretty rare/distant entities. It worked 
VERY well as far as I was concerned. 

I say this only so that someone reading your comment, having only this as an 
option, isn’t dissuaded from trying

Re: Topband: LU5OM shortened dipole (inverted vee) doing a nice job

[CUTTER DAVID via Topband]

Along the same lines, I'm always amazed that folks with 4 squares state they
have such and such gain, f/b ratio and so forth but when modeled with the other
hardware in the field there's quite a poor response.  I would like to read of
anyone who has done actual measurements of these properties, like you might do
on VHF.  All performance figures are about quoting theoretical numbers from the
modeling program in a pure field of just one antenna.  

Perhaps it's ground-mounted antennas that suffer most and beams suffer less
because they are more "complete."

David, G3UNA

> 
> On 25 July 2017 at 18:28 JC <n...@comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi folks
> 
> Let me add some comments on Gary and Bruce savvy remarks.
> 
> The real question is "how many antennas you have for 160m?"
> 
> Using Manuel example, one inverted V and one vertical, for most of us, the
> answer is two, why not, two feed lines that can be switched on the band
> switch, feed with two separated coaxial lines. But what about that other 50
> MHz Yagi with 120ft of cable, grounded only at the back of the radio, that
> coaxial shield can be feed too if you use your tuner connected to the shield,
> so you have another one, ok now it's 3.
> 
> Well the right answer is just one system, all these antennas are so close
> that all interact witch it other as just one, if you feed the Inverted V , the
> inverted V will feed the tower and the 6m cable, and vice versa. The vertical
> will never provide any low angle because the inverted V will shoot it energy
> to the sky.
> 
> It is possible to model all these antennas on EZENEC and see the
> integration. We know that very narrow antennas on VHF can be 5 wave long or
> more, and the directors 5 wave far from the drive element does interact with
> the system, on 160m one wave is 240ft (160m), it means that any wire or
> structure inside that radio is part of your unique irradiation system.
> 
> My friend N8PR lives 3 miles from me , my TX tower is 116ft high and
> Peter's TX tower is 116ft high, my signal used to be 10 db stronger than Pete
> and both using the same power. We figure out the reason. Peter used to have a
> 4 square for 80m, on the same tower, 4 x 80m dipoles with a phasing box at the
> center. Each dipole as a sloper had the lower part connected to the shield of
> the dipole, the shilled of a 1/4 wave long cable connected to the phasing box,
> all 4 of them, the 1/4 wave 80m dipole leg is actually 1/8 wave long on 160m,
> as the same for the feed line, and the same for the other feed line connected
> on the same box,, when you add 1/8 on for the dipole leg, 1/8 for one feed
> line and the 1/8 form the other feed line and the 1/8 from the opposite
> dipole, the result is a 1/2 wave 160m element inside the 160m TX vertical,
> even with all isolated the integration was so strong that Peter's signal was
> 10m db bellow comparing with my TX antenna. The system was irradiating UP!!
> All UP. The 1/2 wave element was working kind of a low dipole.
> 
> We just disconnected the 80m, dipole cables from the phasing box and we
> measured the signal again using RBN and voalahhh.!! Both signals become
> exactly the same on Peter TX on 160m and my TX on 160m.
> 
> Does not matter where are you feeding our 160m antenna, the low SWR does
> not tell you what you really have irradiating the energy. If you want to
> compare two antennas at the same place , it is necessary to fiscally remove
> one when testing the other. Most of the time it is impossible.
> 
> One solution is to detune the second antenna at least 20db, 30 db will be
> better, but hard to achieve.
> 
> The same apply to RX antennas, when you have a RX antenna and an inverted
> V, opening the inverted V, fiscally disconnecting the wires from the coaxial
> cable at the center of the inverted V, the noise or interaction with you RX
> antenna can drop 2 or more S unit.
> 
> Using google you can find videos from N8PR and PY2XB demonstrating the
> noise reduction when the TX antenna is detuned (become non resonant on the
> band you are listening)
> 
> The answer for my question is "just one" always one system.
> 
> Regards
> JC
> N4IS
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>     -Original Message-
> From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> K1FZ-Bruce
> Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 11:01 AM
> To: rxdes...@ssvecnet.com; Topband <topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: LU5OM shortened dipole (inverted vee) doing a nice
> job
> 
> Good information Gary.
> 
> Lot of the fun of low band DXing comes from getting new countri

Re: Topband: LU5OM shortened dipole (inverted vee) doing a nice job

[StellarCAT]

JC,

Totally agree! I have a HiZ 8 element (60' side for the 2X 4 element) 
receive antenna ... when I model it there is BIG time interaction ... I can 
move the 160 meter 'T' (what I'll be using here) 400' away and it still 
interacts with the FB on 160! On this band it is indeed one SYSTEM.


excellent point.

Gary
K9RX

-Original Message- 
From: JC

Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 1:28 PM
To: k...@myfairpoint.net ; rxdes...@ssvecnet.com ; 'Topband'
Subject: RE: Topband: LU5OM shortened dipole (inverted vee) doing a nice job

Hi folks

Let me add some comments on Gary and Bruce savvy remarks.

The real question is "how many antennas you have for 160m?"

Using Manuel example, one inverted V and one vertical, for most of us, the 
answer is two, why not, two feed lines that can be switched on the band 
switch, feed with two separated coaxial lines. But what about that other 50 
MHz Yagi with  120ft of cable, grounded only at the back of the radio, that 
coaxial shield can be feed too if you use your tuner connected to the 
shield, so you have another one, ok now it's 3.


Well the right answer is just one system, all these antennas are so close 
that all interact witch it other as just one, if you feed the Inverted V , 
the inverted V will feed the tower and the 6m cable, and vice versa. The 
vertical will never provide any low angle because the inverted V will shoot 
it energy to the sky.


It is possible to model all these antennas on EZENEC and see the 
integration. We know that very narrow antennas on VHF can be 5 wave long or 
more, and the directors 5 wave far from the drive element does interact with 
the system, on 160m one wave is 240ft (160m), it means that any wire or 
structure inside that radio is part of your unique irradiation system.


My friend N8PR lives 3 miles from me , my TX tower is 116ft high and Peter's 
TX tower is 116ft high, my signal used to be 10 db stronger than Pete and 
both using the same power. We figure out the reason. Peter used to have a 4 
square for 80m, on the same tower, 4 x 80m dipoles with a phasing box at the 
center. Each dipole as a sloper had the lower part connected to the shield 
of the dipole, the shilled of a 1/4 wave long cable connected to the phasing 
box, all 4 of them, the 1/4 wave 80m dipole leg is actually 1/8 wave long on 
160m, as the same for the feed line, and the same for the other feed line 
connected on the same box,, when you add 1/8 on for the dipole leg, 1/8 for 
one feed line and the 1/8 form the other feed line and the 1/8 from the 
opposite dipole, the result is a 1/2 wave 160m element inside the 160m TX 
vertical, even with all isolated the integration was so strong that Peter's 
signal was 10m db bellow comparing with my TX antenna. The system was 
irradiating UP!! All UP. The 1/2 wave element was working  kind of a low 
dipole.


We just disconnected the  80m, dipole cables from the  phasing box and we 
measured the signal again using RBN and voalahhh.!! Both signals become 
exactly the same on Peter TX on 160m and my TX on  160m.


Does not matter where are you feeding our 160m antenna, the low SWR does not 
tell you what you really have irradiating the energy. If you want to compare 
two antennas at the same place , it is necessary to fiscally remove one when 
testing the other. Most of the time it is impossible.


One solution is to detune the  second antenna at least 20db, 30 db will be 
better, but hard to achieve.


The same apply to RX antennas, when you have a RX antenna and an inverted V, 
opening the inverted V, fiscally disconnecting the wires from the coaxial 
cable at the center of the inverted V, the noise or interaction with you RX 
antenna can drop 2 or more S unit.


Using google you can find videos from N8PR and PY2XB demonstrating the noise 
reduction when the TX antenna is detuned (become non resonant on the band 
you are listening)


The answer for my question is "just one" always one system.

Regards
JC
N4IS









-Original Message-
From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of 
K1FZ-Bruce

Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 11:01 AM
To: rxdes...@ssvecnet.com; Topband <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: LU5OM shortened dipole (inverted vee) doing a nice job

Good information Gary.

Lot  of the fun of low band DXing comes from  getting new countries, and 
finding what antenna works best.


Yes, In the transition  that takes place  at gray line time,  there is often 
high angle taking place.


As in the past, building our own radio from scratch  is not so easy, but 
lets "have at it"  with our antennas.


73
Bruce-K1FZ
http://www.qsl.net/k1fz/beverage_antenna.html

On Tue, 25 Jul 2017 08:21:27 -0400, "StellarCAT"  wrote:

that’s a pretty ‘general’ statement! I had a 90’ high inverted L with the 
bend supported by a tower – it was only about 50’ from a 143’ tower ... it 
had ~30 100’ radials under it ... and I managed to wor

Re: Topband: LU5OM shortened dipole (inverted vee) doing a nice job

[JC]

Hi folks

Let me add some comments on Gary and Bruce savvy remarks.

The real question is "how many antennas you have for 160m?"

Using Manuel example, one inverted V and one vertical, for most of us, the 
answer is two, why not, two feed lines that can be switched on the band switch, 
feed with two separated coaxial lines. But what about that other 50 MHz Yagi 
with  120ft of cable, grounded only at the back of the radio, that coaxial 
shield can be feed too if you use your tuner connected to the shield, so you 
have another one, ok now it's 3.

Well the right answer is just one system, all these antennas are so close that 
all interact witch it other as just one, if you feed the Inverted V , the 
inverted V will feed the tower and the 6m cable, and vice versa. The vertical 
will never provide any low angle because the inverted V will shoot it energy to 
the sky. 

It is possible to model all these antennas on EZENEC and see the integration. 
We know that very narrow antennas on VHF can be 5 wave long or more, and the 
directors 5 wave far from the drive element does interact with the system, on 
160m one wave is 240ft (160m), it means that any wire or structure inside that 
radio is part of your unique irradiation system.

My friend N8PR lives 3 miles from me , my TX tower is 116ft high and Peter's TX 
tower is 116ft high, my signal used to be 10 db stronger than Pete and both 
using the same power. We figure out the reason. Peter used to have a 4 square 
for 80m, on the same tower, 4 x 80m dipoles with a phasing box at the center. 
Each dipole as a sloper had the lower part connected to the shield of the 
dipole, the shilled of a 1/4 wave long cable connected to the phasing box, all 
4 of them, the 1/4 wave 80m dipole leg is actually 1/8 wave long on 160m, as 
the same for the feed line, and the same for the other feed line connected on 
the same box,, when you add 1/8 on for the dipole leg, 1/8 for one feed line 
and the 1/8 form the other feed line and the 1/8 from the opposite dipole, the 
result is a 1/2 wave 160m element inside the 160m TX vertical, even with all 
isolated the integration was so strong that Peter's signal was 10m db bellow 
comparing with my TX antenna. The system was irradiating UP!! All UP. The 1/2 
wave element was working  kind of a low dipole.

We just disconnected the  80m, dipole cables from the  phasing box and we 
measured the signal again using RBN and voalahhh.!! Both signals become exactly 
the same on Peter TX on 160m and my TX on  160m.

Does not matter where are you feeding our 160m antenna, the low SWR does not 
tell you what you really have irradiating the energy. If you want to compare 
two antennas at the same place , it is necessary to fiscally remove one when 
testing the other. Most of the time it is impossible.

One solution is to detune the  second antenna at least 20db, 30 db will be 
better, but hard to achieve.

The same apply to RX antennas, when you have a RX antenna and an inverted V, 
opening the inverted V, fiscally disconnecting the wires from the coaxial cable 
at the center of the inverted V, the noise or interaction with you RX antenna 
can drop 2 or more S unit.

Using google you can find videos from N8PR and PY2XB demonstrating the noise 
reduction when the TX antenna is detuned (become non resonant on the band you 
are listening)

The answer for my question is "just one" always one system.

Regards
JC
N4IS 
 






 

-Original Message-
From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of K1FZ-Bruce
Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 11:01 AM
To: rxdes...@ssvecnet.com; Topband <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: LU5OM shortened dipole (inverted vee) doing a nice job

Good information Gary.
 
Lot  of the fun of low band DXing comes from  getting new countries, and 
finding what antenna works best.

Yes, In the transition  that takes place  at gray line time,  there is often  
high angle taking place.

As in the past, building our own radio from scratch  is not so easy, but  lets 
"have at it"  with our antennas.

73
Bruce-K1FZ
http://www.qsl.net/k1fz/beverage_antenna.html

 On Tue, 25 Jul 2017 08:21:27 -0400, "StellarCAT"  wrote:

that’s a pretty ‘general’ statement! I had a 90’ high inverted L with the bend 
supported by a tower – it was only about 50’ from a 143’ tower ... it had ~30 
100’ radials under it ... and I managed to work 100 countries in 89 consecutive 
days - from Arizona! That included some pretty rare/distant entities. It worked 
VERY well as far as I was concerned. 

I say this only so that someone reading your comment, having only this as an 
option, isn’t dissuaded from trying it ... if it is what you have available – 
go for it! 

As for comparing a V at a low height (for most everyone it WILL be at a low 
height) to a vertical and saying the V was better would, I believe, suggest a 
feed system issue I’d think on the vertical. I’d think it w

Re: Topband: LU5OM shortened dipole (inverted vee) doing a nice job

[K1FZ-Bruce]

Good information Gary.
 
Lot  of the fun of low band DXing comes from  getting new countries, and 
finding what antenna works best.

Yes, In the transition  that takes place  at gray line time,  there is often  
high angle taking place.

As in the past, building our own radio from scratch  is not so easy, but  lets 
"have at it"  with our antennas.

73
Bruce-K1FZ
http://www.qsl.net/k1fz/beverage_antenna.html

 On Tue, 25 Jul 2017 08:21:27 -0400, "StellarCAT"  wrote:

that’s a pretty ‘general’ statement! I had a 90’ high inverted L with the bend 
supported by a tower – it was only about 50’ from a 143’ tower ... it had ~30 
100’ radials under it ... and I managed to work 100 countries in 89 consecutive 
days - from Arizona! That included some pretty rare/distant entities. It worked 
VERY well as far as I was concerned. 

I say this only so that someone reading your comment, having only this as an 
option, isn’t dissuaded from trying it ... if it is what you have available – 
go for it! 

As for comparing a V at a low height (for most everyone it WILL be at a low 
height) to a vertical and saying the V was better would, I believe, suggest a 
feed system issue I’d think on the vertical. I’d think it would beat out a 
horizontal, for long distance DX, most of the time – and substantially at that. 
The vertical that is. OR the ground losses are really substantial. Or both.  

Just because DX is worked using a low horizontal antenna doesn’t imply 
something is “good” ... it only implies it is sufficient. “Good”ness is very 
subjective. 

but as they, as we all say – do what you have to ... 

Gary 
K9RX
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: LU5OM shortened dipole (inverted vee) doing a nice job

[StellarCAT]

that’s a pretty ‘general’ statement! I had a 90’ high inverted L with the bend 
supported by a tower – it was only about 50’ from a 143’ tower ... it had ~30 
100’ radials under it ... and I managed to work 100 countries in 89 consecutive 
days - from Arizona! That included some pretty rare/distant entities. It worked 
VERY well as far as I was concerned. 

I say this only so that someone reading your comment, having only this as an 
option, isn’t dissuaded from trying it ... if it is what you have available – 
go for it! 

As for comparing a V at a low height (for most everyone it WILL be at a low 
height) to a vertical and saying the V was better would, I believe, suggest a 
feed system issue I’d think on the vertical. I’d think it would beat out a 
horizontal, for long distance DX, most of the time – and substantially at that. 
The vertical that is. OR the ground losses are really substantial. Or both.  

Just because DX is worked using a low horizontal antenna doesn’t imply 
something is “good” ... it only implies it is sufficient. “Good”ness is very 
subjective. 

but as they, as we all say – do what you have to ... 

Gary 
K9RX

They don't do well if the bend is supported by a tower, or if there are
nearby "weed" parasitic elements from 40 and 80 dipoles/vees lacking the
blocking to isolate them on 160.  L's don't do well if there are trees
inside the bend. Also an L over radials will have quite a bit more current
in the radials beneath the horizontal. This unbalances the efficiency of
the radials as normally found beneath a T or straight vertical.

Comparing an L to an inverted vee on top band is a pretty murky subject.

Some would say that arrival angles via grey line propagation can be quite
high, and thus a high angle antenna might be a lot more useful if grey line
is a frequent mode. There is also a useful NVIS mode that is rarely touted
for DX, but would come into play comparing vee's to whatever if shorter
distances are important.

73, Guy K2AV

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

Re: Topband: LU5OM shortened dipole (inverted vee) doing a nice job

[Phil Duff]

> On Jul 24, 2017, at 1:36 PM, Steve Ireland  wrote:
> 
> If you have losses in the far field from poor soil conductivity, all the 
> radials in the world and a full-size vertical can’t fix this. ;-)

Anyone care to hazard a guess as to what soil conductivity numbers might define 
“poor soil conductivity” for low band vertical antennas/polarization losses?

Here in central Texas with arid rocky poor soil I suspect the soil conductivity 
is pretty low as determined from the table in Low Band DXing.

With many years of using a 78 ft shunt-fed tower with 12-16 on ground radials 
on 160m I have no complaints with my results. I suspect it’s a pretty 
inefficient 160m radiator with high far field losses.  However, with using an 
amp for xmit on 160m my limiting factor for success has been effective 
receiving.   
As the same time while I’ve never used an inverted V/dipole on 160m there are 
160m DX’ers in this region who have been very successful using inverted 
V/dipoles at moderate heights also running QRO.

73 Phil NA4M


-. .- ….- --
Phil Duff  na4m[at]suddenlink[dot]net
philip-duff.pixels.com
tinyurl.com/Philip-Duff-Alamy














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

Re: Topband: LU5OM shortened dipole (inverted vee) doing a nice job

[Lennart m]

Hi gentlemen,
Way back in time - 1982 - I had my first QSO with Mike which actually was the 
first QSO on 160 between SM and VK.
Still recall his pounding signals. Since then we had a lot of QSO:s , always 
with good signals. RIP Mike!

Len SM7BIC

-Ursprungligt meddelande-
Från: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] För Guy Olinger K2AV
Skickat: den 24 juli 2017 16:22
Till: Steve Ireland <vk...@arach.net.au>
Kopia: TopBand List <topband@contesting.com>
Ämne: Re: Topband: LU5OM shortened dipole (inverted vee) doing a nice job

The inverted L has some quirks that if not managed can impact performance.

They don't do well if the bend is supported by a tower, or if there are nearby 
"weed" parasitic elements from 40 and 80 dipoles/vees lacking the blocking to 
isolate them on 160.  L's don't do well if there are trees inside the bend. 
Also an L over radials will have quite a bit more current in the radials 
beneath the horizontal. This unbalances the efficiency of the radials as 
normally found beneath a T or straight vertical.

Comparing an L to an inverted vee on top band is a pretty murky subject.

Some would say that arrival angles via grey line propagation can be quite high, 
and thus a high angle antenna might be a lot more useful if grey line is a 
frequent mode. There is also a useful NVIS mode that is rarely touted for DX, 
but would come into play comparing vee's to whatever if shorter distances are 
important.

73, Guy K2AV

On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 9:36 AM, Steve Ireland <vk...@arach.net.au> wrote:

> G’day
>
> One of the great myths about 160m is that low angle radiation is 
> always needed to work DX on the topband. The other is that almost any 
> kind of vertical antenna will always beat a relatively low (in terms 
> of a
> wavelength) horizontal one for 160m DXing.  It all depends on where 
> you live.
>
> The best advice I was ever given on antennas was by Les Moxon G6XN, 
> who suggested that some locations predominantly suit a particular type 
> of polarisation and one should always try both. Even better, if 
> possible, have both a horizontally polarised and a vertically 
> polarised antenna for your favourite low-band – and switch between them 
> regularly.
>
> In Western Australia, our ground conductivity is so poor that on 160m 
> even vertical antennas over as full-size ground screen lose so much 
> signal in the far-field that a ‘cloud-warmer’ dipole under a quarter 
> wave length high will outperform them.  This situation isn’t helped by 
> the south-west of WA having a geomagnetic latitude that suits 
> horizontal antennas at least as well as vertical ones.
>
> Mike VK6HD, Western Australia’s greatest topband DXer with around 260 
> countries confirmed, found a simple inverted vee dipole about 100’ 
> high generally outperformed his quarter-wave inverted-L with an 80’ 
> vertical section over 132 quarter-wave radials.
>
> Similarly, in VK6 I have tried a heap of different vertical antennas, 
> over a variety of high-quality elevated and buried radial systems, and 
> have always come back to using dipole antennas, of a similar height to 
> that used by Mike and my friend Phil VK6GX. In my case, this has 
> resulted in 236 countries confirmed.
>
> If you have losses in the far field from poor soil conductivity, all 
> the radials in the world and a full-size vertical can’t fix this. ;-)
>
> Vy 73
>
> Steve, VK6VZ/G3ZZD (topbander since 1971)
>
>
> I wondered about the inverted-L. My guess is that it had a poor ground 
> system.
>
> 73, Mike
> www.w0btu.com
>
> On Jul 17, 2017 9:22 AM, "K1FZ-Bruce" <k...@myfairpoint.net> wrote:
>
>
> There are always exceptions.
>
> A few years ago there was someone that had a inverted V that  worked 
> well for DX.
> It was found that it was feed with open wire feeders that acted as a 
> vertical antenna  with top loading.
>
> If  your antenna works well be happy.   Ham radio is a great hobby.
>
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> _
> 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: LU5OM shortened dipole (inverted vee) doing a nice job

[Guy Olinger K2AV]

The inverted L has some quirks that if not managed can impact performance.

They don't do well if the bend is supported by a tower, or if there are
nearby "weed" parasitic elements from 40 and 80 dipoles/vees lacking the
blocking to isolate them on 160.  L's don't do well if there are trees
inside the bend. Also an L over radials will have quite a bit more current
in the radials beneath the horizontal. This unbalances the efficiency of
the radials as normally found beneath a T or straight vertical.

Comparing an L to an inverted vee on top band is a pretty murky subject.

Some would say that arrival angles via grey line propagation can be quite
high, and thus a high angle antenna might be a lot more useful if grey line
is a frequent mode. There is also a useful NVIS mode that is rarely touted
for DX, but would come into play comparing vee's to whatever if shorter
distances are important.

73, Guy K2AV

On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 9:36 AM, Steve Ireland  wrote:

> G’day
>
> One of the great myths about 160m is that low angle radiation is always
> needed to work DX on the topband. The other is that almost any kind of
> vertical antenna will always beat a relatively low (in terms of a
> wavelength) horizontal one for 160m DXing.  It all depends on where you
> live.
>
> The best advice I was ever given on antennas was by Les Moxon G6XN, who
> suggested that some locations predominantly suit a particular type of
> polarisation and one should always try both. Even better, if possible, have
> both a horizontally polarised and a vertically polarised antenna for your
> favourite low-band – and switch between them regularly.
>
> In Western Australia, our ground conductivity is so poor that on 160m even
> vertical antennas over as full-size ground screen lose so much signal in
> the far-field that a ‘cloud-warmer’ dipole under a quarter wave length high
> will outperform them.  This situation isn’t helped by the south-west of WA
> having a geomagnetic latitude that suits horizontal antennas at least as
> well as vertical ones.
>
> Mike VK6HD, Western Australia’s greatest topband DXer with around 260
> countries confirmed, found a simple inverted vee dipole about 100’ high
> generally outperformed his quarter-wave inverted-L with an 80’ vertical
> section over 132 quarter-wave radials.
>
> Similarly, in VK6 I have tried a heap of different vertical antennas, over
> a variety of high-quality elevated and buried radial systems, and have
> always come back to using dipole antennas, of a similar height to that used
> by Mike and my friend Phil VK6GX. In my case, this has resulted in 236
> countries confirmed.
>
> If you have losses in the far field from poor soil conductivity, all the
> radials in the world and a full-size vertical can’t fix this. ;-)
>
> Vy 73
>
> Steve, VK6VZ/G3ZZD (topbander since 1971)
>
>
> I wondered about the inverted-L. My guess is that it had a poor ground
> system.
>
> 73, Mike
> www.w0btu.com
>
> On Jul 17, 2017 9:22 AM, "K1FZ-Bruce"  wrote:
>
>
> There are always exceptions.
>
> A few years ago there was someone that had a inverted V that  worked well
> for DX.
> It was found that it was feed with open wire feeders that acted as a
> vertical antenna  with top loading.
>
> If  your antenna works well be happy.   Ham radio is a great hobby.
>
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> _
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: LU5OM shortened dipole (inverted vee) doing a nice job

[Steve Ireland]

G’day 

One of the great myths about 160m is that low angle radiation is always needed 
to work DX on the topband. The other is that almost any kind of vertical 
antenna will always beat a relatively low (in terms of a wavelength) horizontal 
one for 160m DXing.  It all depends on where you live.

The best advice I was ever given on antennas was by Les Moxon G6XN, who 
suggested that some locations predominantly suit a particular type of 
polarisation and one should always try both. Even better, if possible, have 
both a horizontally polarised and a vertically polarised antenna for your 
favourite low-band – and switch between them regularly. 

In Western Australia, our ground conductivity is so poor that on 160m even 
vertical antennas over as full-size ground screen lose so much signal in the 
far-field that a ‘cloud-warmer’ dipole under a quarter wave length high will 
outperform them.  This situation isn’t helped by the south-west of WA having a 
geomagnetic latitude that suits horizontal antennas at least as well as 
vertical ones.

Mike VK6HD, Western Australia’s greatest topband DXer with around 260 countries 
confirmed, found a simple inverted vee dipole about 100’ high generally 
outperformed his quarter-wave inverted-L with an 80’ vertical section over 132 
quarter-wave radials.  

Similarly, in VK6 I have tried a heap of different vertical antennas, over a 
variety of high-quality elevated and buried radial systems, and have always 
come back to using dipole antennas, of a similar height to that used by Mike 
and my friend Phil VK6GX. In my case, this has resulted in 236 countries 
confirmed. 

If you have losses in the far field from poor soil conductivity, all the 
radials in the world and a full-size vertical can’t fix this. ;-)

Vy 73

Steve, VK6VZ/G3ZZD (topbander since 1971)


I wondered about the inverted-L. My guess is that it had a poor ground
system.

73, Mike
www.w0btu.com

On Jul 17, 2017 9:22 AM, "K1FZ-Bruce"  wrote:


There are always exceptions.

A few years ago there was someone that had a inverted V that  worked well
for DX.
It was found that it was feed with open wire feeders that acted as a
vertical antenna  with top loading.

If  your antenna works well be happy.   Ham radio is a great hobby.



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: LU5OM shortened dipole (inverted vee) doing a nice job

[Mike Waters]

On the other hand --depending on the angle and orientation-- there is
*some* vertically polarized RF radiated from an inverted vee. Especially
off the ends.

73, Mike
www.w0btu.com

On Jul 17, 2017 9:40 AM, "Mike Waters"  wrote:

Exactly, Bruce!  I just posted this about polarization on 160:
ham.stackexchange.com/a/8895/8717

I wondered about the inverted-L. My guess is that it had a poor ground
system.

73, Mike
www.w0btu.com

On Jul 17, 2017 9:22 AM, "K1FZ-Bruce"  wrote:


There are always exceptions.

A few years ago there was someone that had a inverted V that  worked well
for DX.
 It was found that it was feed with open wire feeders that acted as a
vertical antenna  with top loading.

If  your antenna works well be happy.   Ham radio is a great hobby.
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Re: Topband: LU5OM shortened dipole (inverted vee) doing a nice job

[Mike Waters]

Exactly, Bruce!  I just posted this about polarization on 160:
ham.stackexchange.com/a/8895/8717

I wondered about the inverted-L. My guess is that it had a poor ground
system.

73, Mike
www.w0btu.com

On Jul 17, 2017 9:22 AM, "K1FZ-Bruce"  wrote:


There are always exceptions.

A few years ago there was someone that had a inverted V that  worked well
for DX.
 It was found that it was feed with open wire feeders that acted as a
vertical antenna  with top loading.

If  your antenna works well be happy.   Ham radio is a great hobby.
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: LU5OM shortened dipole (inverted vee) doing a nice job

[K1FZ-Bruce]

There are always exceptions.

A few years ago there was someone that had a inverted V that  worked well for 
DX. 
 It was found that it was feed with open wire feeders that acted as a vertical 
antenna  with top loading. 

If  your antenna works well be happy.   Ham radio is a great hobby.

73
Bruce-k1fz
http://www.qsl.net/k1fz/beverage_antenna.html




On Mon, 17 Jul 2017 02:14:48 -0400, Don Kirk  wrote:

Manuel (LU5OM) had been using an Inverted-L on 160 meters, and he recently
switched to a shortened dipole installed as an Inverted Vee.  Each of the
last 3 mornings Manuel has been using his inverted vee and I have heard
Manuel (LU5OM) all 3 days, and this Sunday morning I heard him for 1.25
hours running with a very constant signal that was able to overcome static
crashes from lightning strikes.  I made some recordings for Manuel and
created a brief youtube video of him calling CQ on Sunday and here is the
youtube video URL for those interested.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P56Rq-vCEEU=youtu.be

If Manuel were not transmitting (not calling CQ) you would think the band
was dead, but in reality there has been pretty good propagation for long
periods of time between Indianapolis Indiana and Argentina the past 3 days
that I have listened.

Also in the video I tried to briefly demonstrate for Manuel that the
reduced RF gain trick provides very little (if any) improvement in my
receiver performance on 160 meters when using my very old Kenwood TS-180s
(contrary to what most others report with their receivers).  Maybe I'm not
doing something right, but I've never been able to find noticeable
improvements (to any great extent) in my receiver performance by backing
down my receivers RF gain control.

Just FYI, and 73,
Don (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

Topband: LU5OM shortened dipole (inverted vee) doing a nice job

[Don Kirk]

Manuel (LU5OM) had been using an Inverted-L on 160 meters, and he recently
switched to a shortened dipole installed as an Inverted Vee.  Each of the
last 3 mornings Manuel has been using his inverted vee and I have heard
Manuel (LU5OM) all 3 days, and this Sunday morning I heard him for 1.25
hours running with a very constant signal that was able to overcome static
crashes from lightning strikes.  I made some recordings for Manuel and
created a brief youtube video of him calling CQ on Sunday and here is the
youtube video URL for those interested.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P56Rq-vCEEU=youtu.be

If Manuel were not transmitting (not calling CQ) you would think the band
was dead, but in reality there has been pretty good propagation for long
periods of time between Indianapolis Indiana and Argentina the past 3 days
that I have listened.

Also in the video I tried to briefly demonstrate for Manuel that the
reduced RF gain trick provides very little (if any) improvement in my
receiver performance on 160 meters when using my very old Kenwood TS-180s
(contrary to what most others report with their receivers).  Maybe I'm not
doing something right, but I've never been able to find noticeable
improvements (to any great extent) in my receiver performance by backing
down my receivers RF gain control.

Just FYI, and 73,
Don (wd8dsb)
_
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband