Topband
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Topband: Low Alpha Delta DX-A twin sloper BEST antenna here - howcan

To: "Guy Olinger K2AV" <olinger@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Topband: Low Alpha Delta DX-A twin sloper BEST antenna here - howcan that be? A TEST
From: "Mike & Coreen Smith" <ve9aa@nbnet.nb.ca>
Reply-to: Mike & Coreen Smith <ve9aa@nbnet.nb.ca>
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 15:37:00 -0400
List-post: <topband@contesting.com">mailto:topband@contesting.com>
sEE MY COMMENTS BELOW
  Where is your T bottom with respect to the tower,

  INCHES AWAY FROM BASE OF TOWER.

   how many and kind of radials do you have below the T,
   A COUPLE DOZEN 1/8->1/4 WL RADIALS

   is there a direct connection to the tower, and does the tower base have 
radials?

  BASE OF TOWER SUNK INTO HUGE BLOCK OF CONCRETE.  NOT GROUNDED TO RADIAL 
SYSTEM.

  Guy.


  On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 11:30 AM, Mike & Coreen Smith <ve9aa@nbnet.nb.ca> 
wrote:

    OK, on a lark, I am going to try something.  I just unhooked my A-D twin
    drooper, err, I mean sloper from the
    switchbox, then took a chunk of wire and shorted it out @ the PL-259 end 
at
    the base of the tower.

    The SWR on my T-vertical changed dramatically. (for the better).  There 
must
    have been a lot of interaction, either through the switchbox itself, or 
just
    proximity??

    I'll leave it unhooked for a day or two and see how I make out with no
    reference antenna at all.

    I'll be the 30/S9 signal on the band tonight.......(hee hee)

    Thanks for all the emails.  If this fails or produces mixed results, I 
may
    modify the antenna swaitch back to original if I can remember what I did 
to
    begin with(?) or put a new remote switch in there........or do as a 
couple
    suggested and mount an inverted VEE up near the top of my tower (44'),
    however that's really a last resort....I don't want a cloud burner.

    Another option I guess , is to lay out 100 more radials.  Do-able, but
    wouldn't look forward to it ;-)

    Mike VE9AA

    Mike, Coreen & Corey Smith
    699 Rte 616 Keswick Ridge
    NB
    Canada
    E6L 1T1
     ----- Original Message -----
     From: Kenneth D. Grimm, K4XL
     To: Wes Attaway (N5WA)
     Cc: 'Mike & Coreen Smith' ; topband@contesting.com
     Sent: Saturday, November 07, 2009 11:49 AM
     Subject: Re: Topband: Low Alpha Delta DX-A twin sloper BEST antenna 
here -
    howcan that be?


     Mike,

     The procedure described by Wes below is exactly the approach I would
     take.  If you do this, I'm betting that you are left with #1 below,
     since you said you previously had your antennas over "soggy ground."
     Rocky and soggy are significantly different.
     Good luck with your gremlin chasing.

     73,
     Ken - K4XL

     Wes Attaway (N5WA) wrote:
     > Mike:
     >
     > 1. Maybe the type of rocky ground is the reason.
     > 2. Take down all the other wires and check the L (or T) by itself, 
still
     > using switchbox.
     > 3. Take out the switchbox and just feed the antenna directly (still 
by
     > itself, no other wires)
     > 4. If things are still bad then the problem probably has something to 
do
     > with your location.
     >
     >
     > ------------------ Wes Attaway (N5WA) ------------------
     > 1138 Waters Edge Circle - Shreveport, LA 71106
     >     318-797-4972 (office) - 318-393-3289 (cell)
     >         Computer Consulting and Forensics
     > -------------- EnCase Certified Examiner ---------------
     >
     >
     > -----Original Message-----
     > From: topband-bounces@contesting.com
    [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com]
     > On Behalf Of Mike & Coreen Smith
     > Sent: Saturday, November 07, 2009 6:44 AM
     > To: topband@contesting.com
     > Subject: Topband: Low Alpha Delta DX-A twin sloper BEST antenna 
here -
     > howcan that be?
     >
     > Sorry for the long and rambling post. . . .
     >
     > OK gang, I know antennas "fairly" well, but this has me 
stumped...really
     > REALLY stumped. I've beat myself up over this for 2 yrs. straight.  I
    just
     > can't get it.  I am (almost) ready to rip everything down and start 
from
     > scratch)
     >
     > I posed a ~similar~ question last year and have tried some different
    things,
     >
     > but I'm losing my patience with the wire here (hi)
     >
     > BACKGROUND:
     > At my old QTH, I ran an inverted L...5/16thWL and fed with a 800pF 
cap
    in
     > series.  A dozen to two dozen 1/4wl radials(depending on how many got
    broken
     >
     > in the summer)over soggy ground.  It meandered up 50-ish or so feet 
with
    the
     >
     > remaining 117' up/down/over/under trees --even the tip sloped back
    towards
     > the ground 20' or more.....and it ROCKED....I mean, I wasn't any 
VE1ZZ
    or
     > anything but I felt I was upper middle crust of the W1/VE1 pileup.  I
    also
     > had the exact same tower and exact same Alpha Delta DX-A twin sloper 
up
    (for
     >
     > reference) and it s*cked...really bad.  Easily several S units below
     > anything else on 40-80-160m
     >
     > NOWADAYS:
     > Fast forward to new QTH...same 48' DElhi self supporting tower set in
     > concrete....same 2 long 6m yagis on tower (48/64')....same lil' 
sloper
     > mounted @ 24' off side of tower....
     > I have tried 2 iterations of a plain inverted L.....currently it's a 
"T"
     > antenna. Sloping 55' or so up and 2 T's @ 55' or so each sloping @ 
aprox
    45º
     >
     > to the ground....loads nicely with a few uH @ the base.  Seems 
quieter
    than
     > the A-D twin.
     > I have tried shunt -and- series feeding my 48' tower (no problem to 
do).
     > They have all loaded well and I got a good SWR match with a usually
    narrow
     > window 50Kcs maybe of 2.1:1 SWR of which to operate in.  I have 25 or 
so
     > 1/8wl to 1/4wl radials - 1" below the grass.  Ground is rocky shale?
    sort of
     >
     > stuff.  My QTH is on a nice high ridge and I do quite well on VHF and
    other
     > HF bands.
     >
     > My signal is pitiful on **all** the 160m antennas I've tried....with 
the
     > exception of the 1/4WL Dx-A twin sloper @ 24' !!! (it's best but it
    barely
     > works)
     >
     > The little/low twin sloper off the side of the towe is ALWAYS the
    loudest on
     >
     > the band....by usually 6dB or more........I know this can't be right.
     >
     > How can this be?  I am using a 4-1 antenna switchbox (Ameritron I 
think)
    @
     > the base of the tower which the antennas all share.  Many years back 
I
     > modified it so all antennas "floated" (instead of being grounded) 
when
    not
     > selected as I was using this as a K8UR sloper system switchbox at one
    time.
     > I am pretty sure (but not 100%) that I even ran a separate chunk of 
coax
     > right out to an inverted L last fall in desperation.  I do lots of
    antenna
     > experimenting, so it's sometimes hard to remember the 45th iteration 
of
    a
     > trial I had a couple years ago, hi.
     >
     > I *DO* notice significant SWR curve changes on the lil' wee sloper if 
I
    make
     >
     > any mods to any of the other "REAL" 160m antennas.
     >
     > I either have interactions in the switchbox, or proximity between
    antennas
     > or something that I am totally missing.  All 160m antennas are quite
    close
     > (less than 20-30' away).
     >
     > Logic tells me there is no way in heck the very low Alpha-Delta DX-A
    twin
     > sloper can __always__ be the best antenna to transmit and receive on.
    YET
     > is is !!?  From what I see on the cluster, web and hear on the air, I
    can
     > hear quite well, but DX stations normally have to be 559-579 before I
    even
     > get a QRZ.....I am currently running ~750W.........
     >
     > I'm cracking up.....too much listening to QRN.......sorry for the 
long
    post.
     >
     > Thanks for any insight.  I am ready to put a Webster Bandspanner on 
my
     > mobile and go sit out in the yard and DX.
     > <hi>
     >
     > VE9AA Mike
     >
     > Mike, Coreen & Corey Smith
     > 699 Rte 616 Keswick Ridge
     > NB
     > Canada
     > E6L 1T1
     > _______________________________________________
     > 160 meters is a serious band, it should be treated with respect. - 
TF4M
     >
     > _______________________________________________
     > 160 meters is a serious band, it should be treated with respect. - 
TF4M
     > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
     >
     >
     > No virus found in this incoming message.
     > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
     > Version: 9.0.698 / Virus Database: 270.14.53/2486 - Release Date:
    11/07/09 02:38:00
     >
     >


     --
     Ken K4XL
     k4xl@arrl.net

     *** BoatAnchor Manual Archive ***
     On the web at http://bama.sbc.edu and http://bama.edebris.com
     FTP site info: bama.sbc.edu login: anonymous p/w: youremailadr

     _______________________________________________
     160 meters is a serious band, it should be treated with respect. - TF4M


    
------------------------------------------------------------------------------



     No virus found in this incoming message.
     Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
     Version: 8.5.425 / Virus Database: 270.14.52/2485 - Release Date: 
11/06/09
    19:39:00
    _______________________________________________
    160 meters is a serious band, it should be treated with respect. - TF4M





------------------------------------------------------------------------------



  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
  Version: 8.5.425 / Virus Database: 270.14.52/2485 - Release Date: 11/06/09 
19:39:00
_______________________________________________
160 meters is a serious band, it should be treated with respect. - TF4M

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