RTTY
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RTTY] Lack of RTTY on 40 and 80 Meters

To: RTTY Reflector <rtty@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Lack of RTTY on 40 and 80 Meters
From: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 16:00:21 -0700
List-post: <rtty@contesting.com">mailto:rtty@contesting.com>
On Mar 25, 2014, at 9:45 AM, Tom Osborne wrote:

> I'd have to disagree on that one.  If someone wants to get an antenna for 
> 160, they can do it.  I have seen designs for 160 antennas that are only 33 
> feet tall. 

This story is not about RTTY, but CW:

Up until the 2007 N8S Swains Island DXpedition, I have never in my life worked 
160m.

However, I heard them on 160 with really good SNR.    So, I though... 
reciprocity theory :-).

I have no 160m antenna.  The closest is a HF-2V with elevated radials for 40m 
and 80m (fitting the description of Tom's "33 foot vertical" but without a 
loading coil to match it for 160m).

When I tried it, I could not tune it with either the FT-1000MP's internal 
antenna tuner, or a Ten-Tec 238 manual tuner.  But, with the two of them in 
tandem, I managed to get the Yaesu's PA to see an SWR of less than 3.0:1.  

After a few diditdahdahdidit from N8S, they finally got my callsign correctly.  
I have never dared tried the same stunt after that, so the N8S QSO remains my 
one and only 160m QSO.

I am guessing that I was probably only getting a couple of percent efficiency, 
so the other 90+ watts has to be heating something up :-).

If DX can be worked with such a set up, a properly built capacitance loaded 33 
foot tall antenna (with a decent counterpoise) will probably do OK.

73
Chen, W7AY


_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>