before you scrap the 4 square idea, you better consult with K1ZM and
W3LPL who have both had good success with the arrays.
Bob WA3EUL
On Wed, 27 Nov 1996 CQK8DO@aol.com wrote:
> Just a parenthetical addition to Rich's excellent note....
>
> I am continuing on the conversion of my 160 two element parasitic array,
> into a four element parasitic array.... My experiments with a 160 inverted
> vee at 150 feet versus a single 1/4w vertical had the same results as Rich
> found, with the vertical being superior (but the worms preferring the vee -
> that's worm warmer, not cloud burner, Rich.)... so the phased array should be
> even better... I hope, i hope, I hope, etc.
>
> Now, (even though this is topband)... this cqww I used the partly completed
> #2 tower as a quarter wave vertical for 80... Rohn 25 with insulated base at
> 8 feet, and 4 elevated radials, 1/4 wave long by 8 feet high, each.... I did
> run #14 bare copper up two of the tower legs, clamped and shorted
> together... this was complemented by an inverted vee at 150 feet... I kept
> track of which antenna was switched in line by the operators, and it was the
> vee about 90% of the time... the vertical is not a bad antenna, but the vee
> seems to have an edge... this is making me question the wisdom of completing
> the 4 element vertical array for 80, as opposed to something horizontal and
> rotatable...
>
> Opinions?
>
> Denny k8do@aol.com
>
> --
> FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/topband.html
> Submissions: topband@contesting.com
> Administrative requests: topband-REQUEST@contesting.com
> Sponsored by Akorn Access, Inc & KM9P
>
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/topband.html
Submissions: topband@contesting.com
Administrative requests: topband-REQUEST@contesting.com
Sponsored by Akorn Access, Inc & KM9P
|