If that were not enough, W8JI famously had a 160 dipole up 270 feet doing
A/B tests vs. his verticals, this for over a year I think. In the end, he
heard better signals on the dipole just a handful of times. Most of the
time the verticals were significantly better.
160 is on the vertical polarization side of a dotted line somewhere between
160 and 80 meters where there is some poorly defined and poorly understood
modal shift, heavily favoring vertical for non-NVIS paths on 160.
For some, an inverted vee is a possibility where other physical
configurations are just not possible. If that is what you can do, it sure
beats not being on the band :>)
Phasing two of them will get you 2-3 db over just one of them. But probably
the two will get beaten by an *efficient* inverted L over an *efficient*
counterpoise, because the L will smoke any inverted vee at low angles, and
is on the correct side of whatever the modal shift is.
The emphasized "efficient" modifier twice in the last sentence is very much
intentional.
On 160 it is very easy to lose energy to induced current in the ground, or
miscellaneous dielectric loss. If your reason for choosing an inverted vee
is not because of physical site restraints, then it is very likely that
prior vertical attempts were diminished, possibly severely diminished, by
losses avoidable with various techniques.
The big loss advantage of an inverted vee is that 1) there is no lossy
counterpoise and 2) the RF current max is way in the air. There are ways to
invoke those advantages with vertically polarized antennas. An inverted L
out in the clear over an FCP is a good one, but only one over some several
vertical alternatives.
73, Guy K2AV
On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 9:25 AM, Herbert Schoenbohm <
herbert.schoenbohm@gmail.com> wrote:
> Probably not worth the effort as any dipoles less than 250 feet high are
> serious cloud warmers.
>
>
>
> On 10/10/2016 9:21 AM, Filipe Lopes wrote:
>
>> Hi guys
>>
>> We are rebuilding our station and I was thinking about putting up 2
>> dipoles
>> 1/8 wavelength apart.
>>
>> Has anyone ever tried to phase them for example with Christman method?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Filipe Lopes CT1ILT aka CR6K
>>
>> Sent from my Huawei Mate 8
>> _________________
>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>>
>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
|