that’s a pretty ‘general’ statement! I had a 90’ high inverted L with the bend
supported by a tower – it was only about 50’ from a 143’ tower ... it had ~30
100’ radials under it ... and I managed to work 100 countries in 89 consecutive
days - from Arizona! That included some pretty rare/distant entities. It worked
VERY well as far as I was concerned.
I say this only so that someone reading your comment, having only this as an
option, isn’t dissuaded from trying it ... if it is what you have available –
go for it!
As for comparing a V at a low height (for most everyone it WILL be at a low
height) to a vertical and saying the V was better would, I believe, suggest a
feed system issue I’d think on the vertical. I’d think it would beat out a
horizontal, for long distance DX, most of the time – and substantially at that.
The vertical that is. OR the ground losses are really substantial. Or both.
Just because DX is worked using a low horizontal antenna doesn’t imply
something is “good” ... it only implies it is sufficient. “Good”ness is very
subjective.
but as they, as we all say – do what you have to ...
Gary
K9RX
They don't do well if the bend is supported by a tower, or if there are
nearby "weed" parasitic elements from 40 and 80 dipoles/vees lacking the
blocking to isolate them on 160. L's don't do well if there are trees
inside the bend. Also an L over radials will have quite a bit more current
in the radials beneath the horizontal. This unbalances the efficiency of
the radials as normally found beneath a T or straight vertical.
Comparing an L to an inverted vee on top band is a pretty murky subject.
Some would say that arrival angles via grey line propagation can be quite
high, and thus a high angle antenna might be a lot more useful if grey line
is a frequent mode. There is also a useful NVIS mode that is rarely touted
for DX, but would come into play comparing vee's to whatever if shorter
distances are important.
73, Guy K2AV
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
|