THIS IS A TYPICAL EXAMPLE
Of how I warn people not to be too worried if you are unable to install the
textbook perfect "best practice" as Darrell and Jim are describing here.
Of course they are 100% correct with their recommendation of how to do it
right and of course the signal degrades when you for one reason or another
don't do that, but that doesn't mean your signal goes to hell in a hand
basket as some might assume here.
Due to neighborhood restrictions, my 80m OCF dipole is just 12m (40 ft.
high) at its feedpoint and the ends are about 30 ft. high. This is just
over 1/8 wavelength on 80m - a far cry from the 130 ft. it should be for
optimum performance.
And although I am surrounded by high mountains on 3 sides, in the CQWW DX
contests for several years running, I worked an awful lot of DX.
Generally I was on the air for about 30 hours in the contest, worked all 6
contest bands and lots of countries on all bands.
On 80m with this low dipole:
2012 CW: 60 countries
2013 CW: 56 countries
2014 CW: 36 countries (in about 2 hours on 80m)
Sure the countries are not far away here in Europe.
My point is, you can work an awful lot with an antenna that is a lot less
than perfect.
Of course we should always strive to build our antennas as best we can, but
don't let a lousy QTH discourage you from trying something a lot less than
perfect. Remember "Everything Works."
73 - Rick, DJ0IP
(Nr. Frankfurt, Germany)
-----Original Message-----
From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Carl
Moreschi
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 12:50 AM
To: k9yc@arrl.net; Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
Subject: Re: [TenTec] OT: Question to the group -tuner and dipoles
I'm not saying it is good to have a low antenna, I'm just saying a low
dipole is efficient in terms of how much power it radiates, but is is just
in the wrong direction.
My particular interest right now is a good antenna for the new 475 khz band
that is coming. I have a 1000 foot dipole at 50 feet and it shows an
excellent load at 475 khz. My belief is this antenna will be more efficient
even at a 20 degree takeoff angle than a 50 foot vertical that has a very
large and inefficient loading coil and radials.
Carl Moreschi N4PY
58 Hogwood Rd
Louisburg, NC 27549
www.n4py.com
On 7/18/2016 6:40 PM, Jim Brown wrote:
> On Mon,7/18/2016 3:32 PM, Carl Moreschi wrote:
>> Does anyone have any real data to either support this or refute it?
>
> I've posted the link to my work several times.
> http://k9yc.com/AntennaPlanning.pdf
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|