I'm thinking of installing an end-fed half-wave dipole as an "inverted U" for 160m. My tree geometry is such that the antenna would be fed at the base of a tree, then go up it to 120 feet. Then about
Hi John, Horizontal polarization isn't very effective on topband except for local QSOs. It would be far better if you could install an inverted-L vertical 73 Frank W3LPL -- Original Message -- I'm th
A Few years ago there was a detailed article all about this in QST. Joe WB9SBD Sig The Original Rolling Ball Clock Idle Tyme Idle-Tyme.com http://www.idle-tyme.com On 8/19/2019 6:49 PM, donovanf@star
John, your 80M dipole with 110 foot vertical feedline fed as a top-loaded vertical on 160M is a wonderful antenna. If you are unhappy with its receive performance,the solution is to add a receive ant
Thanks for the info guys. If only I had room for a dedicated rx antenna - then I'd leave the top-loaded vertical as is. I was copied in New Zealand with it on 630m WSPR with 1 watt ERP. So a happy me
Couldn't have possibly said it any better, Frank et al !! For you, John: http://www.w0btu.com/160_meters.html :-) 73, Mike www.w0btu.com _________________ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.c
Last year I used my 80m dipole-110-foot vertical feedline as a top-loaded vertical on 160 - it worked well as a transmitting antenna but was a poor receiver due to noise so looking for another option
I would never consider compromising a TX antenna just to hear better. Perhaps a T vertical with a feedline choke similar to your 80m dipole and feedline radiator footprint would help with any local n
All I have been running a 160M Inverted L right up beside some pine trees to the 80ft level and then I have the horizontal part moving away. The support for the vertical part is in the tree it runs u