To: | "'Mike Waters'" <mikewate@gmail.com>, "'topband'" <topband@contesting.com> |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: Topband: 5/8 wavelength vertical is mo betta than shorterversions?? |
From: | "Charlie Cunningham" <charlie-cunningham@nc.rr.com> |
Date: | Thu, 26 Sep 2013 11:11:15 -0400 |
List-post: | <topband@contesting.com">mailto:topband@contesting.com> |
Quite a bit of the radiation from 5/8 wave verticals is at relatively high elevation angles - above 40 degrees elevation. (Perhaps useful for VHF mobiles that need to hit mountain top or hill-top repeaters) Charlie, K4OTV -----Original Message----- From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Mike Waters Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 10:53 AM To: topband Subject: Re: Topband: 5/8 wavelength vertical is mo betta than shorterversions?? A lot of hams on 160m have been similarly "shocked". :-) 73, Mike www.w0btu.com On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Niko Cimbur <ac6dd@yahoo.com> wrote: > > We were shocked to find that the existing 1/4 wl performed better than the > much taller [5/8 wave] Vertical. > _________________ Topband Reflector _________________ Topband Reflector |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: Topband: 5/8 wavelength vertical is mo betta than shorterversions??, Mike Waters |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: Topband: 5/8 wavelength vertical is mo betta than shorterversions??, Herb Schoenbohm |
Previous by Thread: | Re: Topband: 5/8 wavelength vertical is mo betta than shorterversions??, Mike Waters |
Next by Thread: | Re: Topband: 5/8 wavelength vertical is mo bettathan shorterversions??, Tom W8JI |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |