Roger I think your namesake Roger VE3CZ ex G3RBP has a vertical dipole.
Richard -----Original Message----- From: Topband <[email protected]> On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: 24 March 2021 16:02 To: [email protected] Subject: Topband Digest, Vol 219, Issue 24 Send Topband mailing list submissions to [email protected] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [email protected] You can reach the person managing the list at [email protected] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Topband digest..." Today's Topics: 1. NQ9E - QRM ([email protected]) 2. New Subject: 160M array feedline question (Roger Kennedy) 3. Re: New Subject: 160M array feedline question (W7TMT - Patrick) 4. Re: New Subject: 160M array feedline question (W7TMT - Patrick) 5. Re: NQ9E - QRM (List Mail) 6. subscription cancel KI7M (Terry Burge) 7. Re: subscription cancel KI7M (fmoeves) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 16:38:13 +0000 From: [email protected] To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]> Subject: Topband: NQ9E - QRM Message-ID: <43211f2d50890af85ac09941447cf326b6170c74@webmail> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 sosunds like you may have power line noise which wont go away, but may vary with weather. I had similar problems which I tracked down with an AM radio, and driving along the roads around my house til I located the likely culprit, a continuously arcing lightning arrestor on a pole about 0.7 miles away. I called the utility and met their crew at the site. Turns out the problem wasnt at the pole I thought it was, but one pole over. The utility crew heard the arcing and changed the arrestor. No more problems. Arrestors can only take so manch discharges. In my case, it didnt clear, and remained steadily arcing 7/24. That costs the utility $$$ in wasted power, so they were happy for me to help them find it. ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 22:33:53 -0000 From: "Roger Kennedy" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Subject: Topband: New Subject: 160M array feedline question Message-ID: <59DB7AE806B74210AE3DF4C24174B2C7@Packard> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Guy (K2AV) - I really liked your explanation about the function of a radial field on a 160m vertical . . . and how the radials don't actually radiate. But I've often thought about the other extreme . . . I have a homebrew 2m Ground Plane on top of my mast . . . just a quarter wave vertical . . . and 3 quarter wave radials sloping down about 45 degrees. Now if those radials were vertical, it would really be a vertical Dipole . . . i.e. the radials would be radiating. Whereas if they were horizontal, I guess they wouldn't be. You get my question . . . what really is the difference between the 3 different radial situations? And here's another question . . . rather than all the issues of radials and matching, has anyone ever used a Vertical Dipole on 160m ? Sure, you're not going to have a 260 ft vertical . . . but suppose you had a 100ft support, so that you could have 50 ft vertical legs either side of the coax feeder, and then just bend the legs at right angles at the top and bottom to make up the length (linear loading) - maybe running in opposite directions. I would have though that would be quite an efficient antenna? And presumably (just like any dipole) it would work even better if the ground underneath it was very poor (in my opinion) Roger G3YRO ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 22:41:34 +0000 From: W7TMT - Patrick <[email protected]> To: Roger Kennedy <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Topband: New Subject: 160M array feedline question Message-ID: <mw2pr1501mb1978aee05f3b32d72305b042f1...@mw2pr1501mb1978.namprd15.prod.outl ook.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Called a Double L. This is the earliest article on it I remember. Others out there as well. http://www.yccc.org/http://www.yccc.org/Articles/double_l.ht/double_l.htm Patrick, W7TMT ________________________________ From: Topband <[email protected]> on behalf of Roger Kennedy <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2021 3:33:53 PM To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Topband: New Subject: 160M array feedline question Guy (K2AV) - I really liked your explanation about the function of a radial field on a 160m vertical . . . and how the radials don't actually radiate. But I've often thought about the other extreme . . . I have a homebrew 2m Ground Plane on top of my mast . . . just a quarter wave vertical . . . and 3 quarter wave radials sloping down about 45 degrees. Now if those radials were vertical, it would really be a vertical Dipole . . . i.e. the radials would be radiating. Whereas if they were horizontal, I guess they wouldn't be. You get my question . . . what really is the difference between the 3 different radial situations? And here's another question . . . rather than all the issues of radials and matching, has anyone ever used a Vertical Dipole on 160m ? Sure, you're not going to have a 260 ft vertical . . . but suppose you had a 100ft support, so that you could have 50 ft vertical legs either side of the coax feeder, and then just bend the legs at right angles at the top and bottom to make up the length (linear loading) - maybe running in opposite directions. I would have though that would be quite an efficient antenna? And presumably (just like any dipole) it would work even better if the ground underneath it was very poor (in my opinion) Roger G3YRO _________________ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 22:48:13 +0000 From: W7TMT - Patrick <[email protected]> To: Roger Kennedy <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Topband: New Subject: 160M array feedline question Message-ID: <mw2pr1501mb1978fa43ccb1e576300872c4f1...@mw2pr1501mb1978.namprd15.prod.outl ook.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Ooops, sorry about the cut and paste error. This link should work. http://www.yccc.org/Articles/double_l.htm ________________________________ From: Topband <[email protected]> on behalf of W7TMT - Patrick <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2021 3:41:34 PM To: Roger Kennedy <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Topband: New Subject: 160M array feedline question Called a Double L. This is the earliest article on it I remember. Others out there as well. http://www.yccc.org/http://www.yccc.org/Articles/double_l.ht/double_l.htm Patrick, W7TMT ________________________________ From: Topband <[email protected]> on behalf of Roger Kennedy <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2021 3:33:53 PM To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Topband: New Subject: 160M array feedline question Guy (K2AV) - I really liked your explanation about the function of a radial field on a 160m vertical . . . and how the radials don't actually radiate. But I've often thought about the other extreme . . . I have a homebrew 2m Ground Plane on top of my mast . . . just a quarter wave vertical . . . and 3 quarter wave radials sloping down about 45 degrees. Now if those radials were vertical, it would really be a vertical Dipole . . . i.e. the radials would be radiating. Whereas if they were horizontal, I guess they wouldn't be. You get my question . . . what really is the difference between the 3 different radial situations? And here's another question . . . rather than all the issues of radials and matching, has anyone ever used a Vertical Dipole on 160m ? Sure, you're not going to have a 260 ft vertical . . . but suppose you had a 100ft support, so that you could have 50 ft vertical legs either side of the coax feeder, and then just bend the legs at right angles at the top and bottom to make up the length (linear loading) - maybe running in opposite directions. I would have though that would be quite an efficient antenna? And presumably (just like any dipole) it would work even better if the ground underneath it was very poor (in my opinion) Roger G3YRO _________________ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector _________________ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2021 11:45:48 +1100 From: List Mail <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Topband: NQ9E - QRM Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Not to mention a fire hazard. Our power comes in on a Single Wire, Earth Return system. I hear a bit of power line noise on my antennas closer to the pole transformer, but as I receive on my Beverage system, hundreds of metres away, it isn?t a problem for me. Since the Black Saturday Bushfires of 2009, where an ignition of a major fire system was traced to a faulty power pole, the distribution companies have been very diligent with their maintenance of the system (they weren?t since privatization of the grid). The sensitivity of the breakers has been increased, and they don?t reclose automatically now. The main problem with man made noise now is non-EMI compliant electronic equipment. I feel the horse has bolted there. And, conditions on 160 m are very poor here, both to NA and EU. 73, Luke VK3HJ Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, 24 March 2021 3:38 AM To: '[email protected]' Subject: Topband: NQ9E - QRM sosunds like you may have power line noise which wont go away, but may vary with weather. I had similar problems which I tracked down with an AM radio, and driving along the roads around my house til I located the likely culprit, a continuously arcing lightning arrestor on a pole about 0.7 miles away. I called the utility and met their crew at the site. Turns out the problem wasnt at the pole I thought it was, but one pole over. The utility crew heard the arcing and changed the arrestor. No more problems. Arrestors can only take so manch discharges. In my case, it didnt clear, and remained steadily arcing 7/24. That costs the utility $$$ in wasted power, so they were happy for me to help them find it. _________________ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 18:16:02 -0700 From: Terry Burge <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Topband: subscription cancel KI7M Message-ID: <CAOJvVPXk1R2J4Tjyd2xP2ZpnMrUd=H4QqfM5=eqgsphtng3...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Please cancel my subscription to the topband group. Terry KI7M ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2021 06:39:55 -0400 From: fmoeves <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Topband: subscription cancel KI7M Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Another hack???Fred KB4QZH? -------- Original message --------From: Terry Burge <[email protected]> Date: 3/23/21 9:16 PM (GMT-05:00) To: [email protected], [email protected] Subject: Topband: subscription cancel KI7M Please cancel my subscription to the topband group.TerryKI7M_________________Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ Topband mailing list [email protected] http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband ------------------------------ End of Topband Digest, Vol 219, Issue 24 **************************************** _________________ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
