>(An Inverted V is really a half-Rhombic turned on its side, with the
>earth forming the other half. Somehow we started calling droopy
>dipoles Invereted V's.)
Au contraire:
An inverted V is a reasonable description of the antenna that is
based on a dipole. Calling it a " half-Rhombic turned on its side"
is not only more clumsy to say it is also technically incorrect.
The rhombic has legs that are MULTIPLE 1/4 Wavelengths on
a side (when used in the resonant mode without a termination),
whereas the inverted V has only a SINGLE 1/4 wave on a side.
In the non-resonant mode the rhombic still has legs MUCH longer
that a 1/4 wavelength and requires terminations--something that is
never done with an inverted V.
73 John W0UN
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search
|