Author: thoyer via Topband <topband@contesting.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 20:04:03 -0500
With only 9 more to go for DXCC on 160 and all of the recent posts about how good the band has been recently "best in years....) I find myself with no antenna for the low bands and cringing after eac
or you could use a remote. W0MU On 12/15/2019 6:04 PM, thoyer via Topband wrote: With only 9 more to go for DXCC on 160 and all of the recent posts about how good the band has been recently "best in
Author: thoyer via Topband <topband@contesting.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 20:36:14 -0500
All of my contacts for DXCC have been and will be from my property and I'd like to keep it that way (CW only also) W3TA or you could use a remote. W0MU 100' _________________ Searchable Archives: htt
Do the inverted-L, but use at least two 10' high 1/4 wave radials. Do NOT use an RF ground rod, or any radials on or near the earth. Just connect the coax shield to the junction of the radials and an
2nd mike's point about the elevated radials if you have the room, and I underscore his point about not connecting the above gnd radials to earth ground and the need for a beefy common mode choke Dave
Author: "Chortek, Robert L." <Robert.Chortek@berliner.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 02:52:17 +0000
Easy! Get a 60 Spiderbeam Fibeeglaas pole. Run a wire up the side and top load it with two 44 wires running out at 45 degrees or less. Use an isolation transformer at the base and Run it against 8-12
So you suggest giving up 10 feet of a 45 foot vertical in order to raise the radials? Doesn't make sense to me. With a 45' tower I supported an inverted-V and worked my first 70+ countries on 160 fr
Good for you. My sentiments are on my QRZ page. Wes N7WS W3TA or you could use a remote. W0MU _________________ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Get a 60 Spiderbeam Fibeeglaas pole. Run a wire up the side and top load it with two 44 wires running out at 45 degrees or less. Mine was so easy to install I was able to it alone with any trouble at
Author: "Chortek, Robert L." <Robert.Chortek@berliner.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 04:07:48 +0000
Sure, I mounted the bottom of the pole onto a 6 piece of 3 PVC Pipe buried 3 into the ground, I then extended the first two (or was it three) sections of the pole and attached it to the Eave of the h
Author: w9zr--- via Topband <topband@contesting.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 12:30:16 +0000 (UTC)
I used a similar to Rick's and raised and lowered it by myself.....EVERY DAY....for a few years. It took less than 10 minutes once I got the hang of it. During the winter I live in Florida in a comm
CORRECTION It was just pointed out to me that I neglected to mention that the feedpoint on my 160m inverted-L was much lower than 10 feet high! The tuner sits on the earth, and the two wires go strai
Hi Mike, Years ago my 4-square transmitting array used "gull-wing" elevated radials sloping 45 degrees from the feedpoint at ground level to about ten feet high. When I replaced the radials with sixt
Hi Csaba, My experience is that an extensive radial system on the ground performs significantly better than a few elevated radials. I suspect its difficult to obtain nearly equal currents among a sma
Frank I agree with you if the elevated radials are "resonant" . However my experience is the direct opposite with non resonant radials for my elevated system. Mine are 90' long for 160M. So far this
Hi Dave, I remember K5IU's article well. I have no doubt such a system can be made to work well. However, I have no plans to replace my 30,000 feet of radials with elevated radials... Thanks 73 Frank
Hi Frank! Thank you for sharing this experience. This is interesting, because (as you are probably aware of) no less a guru than N6LF published results showing that with a single antenna, four /4 ele
Mike, I think the problem with elevated radials in 4 squares is the mutual coupling and the necessity that the radial current and impedance be equal. Otherwise the pattern is distorted. Having measur
Mike, I think the performance of a 4-square array may relate to the reason why switching to 30,000 feet of radials made a dramatic improvement. The currents in the elevated radial currents might be b