Me too. I still have a multi-band vertical up, but of course its not a half
wave dipole. Even so, it compares reasonably well with my beam. (That is,
the beam is better, but not by an overwhelming margin). So, going to a half
wave vertical dipole might be quite effective, as well as fun. Of course,
the front to back would be terrible by comparison.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert & Linda McGraw K4TAX" <RMcGraw@Blomand.Net>
To: "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment" <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 9:08 AM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Vertical Dipole "Fringe Benefits"
> I agree. All this discussion, while not directly Tentec related, has got
me
> to thinking about putting up a vertical dipole.
>
> 73
> Bob, K4TAX
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>
> To: "'Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment'" <tentec@contesting.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 4:59 AM
> Subject: [TenTec] Vertical Dipole "Fringe Benefits"
>
>
> > Ten-Tec is my first love in radio equipment, that's why I'm on this
> > reflector.
> >
> >
> >
> > I guess it's time for Ten-Tec to release a new product because we
haven't
> > seen much complaining here for quite some time now (hi).
> >
> >
> >
> > Until then, I am enjoying these antenna discussions.
> >
> >
> >
> > THE VERTICAL DIPOLE AND 80m SURPRISE: DX better than on the full size
> > dipole.(often)
> >
> >
> >
> > I put up the vertical dipole for the first time ever in 1993 when I
moved
> > into my previous QTH, which didn't have much ground space.
> >
> > I took it down once I got the beam and openwire fed horizontal dipole
up.
> >
> >
> >
> > Here at the new QTH I use the vertical dipole everyday, though each side
> > is
> > now 1m longer than it was at the previous QTH.
> >
> >
> >
> > I have had horizontal dipoles (dublets) fed with openwire at my last 3
> > locations.
> >
> > Each was a different size, based on the space I had available.
> >
> > All were about the same height: 13m (40 ft.).
> >
> > They were: 2x 20m (now, used 6 years), 2x 10m previously (used 7 years),
> > and
> > 2x 13m (used 5 years)
> >
> >
> >
> > The first interesting question might be, how did these 3 compare?
> >
> > Hey, this is about as subjective as it gets, because they were used
during
> > different times, different sunspot cycles and at different locations.
> >
> >
> >
> > My highly subjective gut feeling, for 40m and above, all performed about
> > equally well.
> >
> > For 80m, the 2x13m performed about the same as the 2x20m and the 2x10m
was
> > noticeably weaker. This is based on my ability to work multis in
contests
> > with the first or second call, as well as the day to day reports I got
in
> > my
> > 80m skeds.
> >
> >
> >
> > Now the surprise. I have always tried to orient these horizontal
antennas
> > such that I could have the major lobe facing stateside, and as a result,
> > working Asiatic Russia has always been a real challenge. In contests, I
> > could hear those guys 599 for hours but simply couldn't work them.
> > Eventually I would snag one but the time wasted wasn't helping my
contest
> > score.
> >
> >
> >
> > At the last QTH, 2x10m, I pulled the openwire feedline out of the
Annecke
> > and stuck just one side of it into an MFJ Differential-T. My only
ground
> > was the cold water pipe. I had no radials or counterpoise. This was a
> > panic
> > effort in the middle of a CQWW to try and work UK9/0. Hey, I worked it
in
> > a
> > relatively short time. This tells me the radiation pattern of the
> > "Inverted-L" which I had converted my horizontal dipole into was more
> > favorable for the east in that configuration than in the classical
dipole
> > configuration. Remember, I had already taken down my vertical dipole
and
> > didn't have it.
> >
> >
> >
> > Here at the new QTH, I have the vertical dipole. I found I can call for
> > hours using the horizontal dipole and still don't manage to work UK9/0 -
> > even with maximum legal power. However, switching to the vertical
dipole,
> > I
> > can work them even with 100w with just a few calls.
> >
> >
> >
> > So two years ago, I worked a CQWW single band 80m from home and spent
most
> > of the time just switching between antennas. For transatlantic work it
> > was
> > a wash. One time the signal was louder on the horizontal (full size up
> > 13m), the next time it was louder on the vertical. For working the
> > European
> > multipliers, the horizontal was almost always a couple of S-units
louder.
> > Asiatic Russia only worked on the Vertical Dipole.
> >
> >
> >
> > The following year (last year) I stayed home again for CQWW but didn't
put
> > in a serious effort. Still, I made another valuable experience. On
40m,
> > the vertical dipole was almost always 1 S-Unit better than the 2x20m
> > horizontal on long-haul, but the big surprise was that for EU
multipliers,
> > the vertical dipole was also stronger - almost always, except for the
> > countries which are very close to Bavaria.
> >
> >
> >
> > The Bottom Line: It's sure nice to have two antennas instead of just
one.
> > The vertical dipole is a significant enhancement to my station even on
the
> > low bands, where I, for many years, only had a horizontal dipole. This
> > was
> > a pleasant surprise because I had initially put the vertical up for the
> > high
> > bands.
> >
> >
> >
> > 73
> >
> > Rick
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > TenTec mailing list
> > TenTec@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|