Most of the discussion I see about verticals assumes ground mounting, and I guess that it is because of ease of installation. However, ground mounting also requires an extensive radial system. How do
I have an old AV3 10-15-20m vertical. I used to have it on top of a 20' pole with 4 radials for each band. Compared to my A4S it was so bad as to be useless - although the match was good on every ban
My mileage did indeed vary. I had an old 14AVQ mounted as a ground-plane up about 35' and it was a killer DX antenna, not as good as my TH-6DXX at 75' but very good as a second antenna. I later mount
My experience is closer to W4ZWs. My 6BTV at 28' with 24 radials is comparable to my inverted vees at 55 feet, and typically 6 dB down from my beams on 15 & 20 meters at 60'. Moving it to the ground
Interesting, I was just thinking of taking my Butternut vertical off the ground and mounting it to the top of my mast above my Hornet Tribander at around 35 feet. So far it sounds like it might just
In the true spirit of hamming, just put it up and try it. The tower/beam might work OK. But, it might not. I once had an R-5 up like that and it worked great. I think you will get a lot of differing
A vertical above your beam will not work. An elevated vertical must have resonant radials. 73 Gary K4FMX _______________________________________________ ______________________________________________
or some other matching method, e.g. a tuner at the base. Resonant radials just provide a reasonably nice resistive impedance at the feedpoint. There's not much difference in "efficiency" of the radia
Now you have my attention, I have a tuner. One built into the rig and another external for QRO. I am thinking more and more 'try mikey you might like it' may be the way to go on this one. It is reall
Try a Cushcraft R-5 or R-7. They are 3/8 WL verticals with a matching unit and counterpoise arrangement. I used these on top of an A4S in Europe and it worked great. Remember to place a golf ball in
That's not really true. Elevated radials don't have to be resonant for an antenna to work well, or even be resonant. It is possible, for example, to have the COMBINATION of the vertical element and t
I don't know where you live but here in Florida where it's flat, especially here off the Gulf of Mexico my HF2V catches PLENTY of wind. Tapered or not, it's guyed in three directions with 100lb test
Bob, have you modeled it? I bet you will be surprised at what you find... Don't get carried away and try to replicate your beam and all that... Just model a 55 vertical tower at 10" dia with a 17.5 f
Bob -- I rest my case. You got a lot of different opinions. Try it and let everyone know how it works. -- Wes Attaway (N5WA) -- 1138 Waters Edge Circle - Shreveport, LA 71106 318-797-4972 (office) -
Good advice. But I would insert the beam into the model as being connected to the tower, and the tower connected to the bottom of the vertical on one end and to ground on the other, with the transmit
Hi Jim, For a roof mounted vertical, would 4 quarter wavelength radials for each band be sufficient? 73s John AA5JG _______________________________________________ ___________________________________
I said that "A vertical above your beam will not work. An elevated vertical must have resonant radials". At the end of your post you say the same thing. With a quarter wave vertical mounted on the ma
No, I didn't say the same thing. I didn't say that it was required for the system to be resonant, and it isn't. It is just trickier (sharper tuning) to tune any sort of off-center feed to resonance i
Not sure if anyone mentioned this (I didn't read all the responses) but installing a Butternut or other long vertical on a mast over a beam is impractical in high winds because these things need at l
Yes. In general, four per band is plenty if the feedpoint is at least 1/8 wavelength above the earth. As you get closer than that, radials begin to couple to the earth and the earth currents burn TX