Tom, maybe that was a typo? I see 100x150 feet in your
message. 150 feet is of course plenty of room for a full
sized 80m dipole/inverted vee.
My experience is, yes there is a big difference in performance
from a shortened dipole for 80m then a full sized one. Plus
you won't have much bandwidth with the shortened version.
73 - Mike K9MI
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Anderson" <ww5l@gte.net>
To: <TowerTalk@contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2001 10:10 AM
Subject: [TowerTalk] Shortened 80m dipole/inverted vee
>
>
>
> After taking a lightnming hit I'm redoing the antenna configuration on my
crank
> up tower. One question is does anyone know how efficient a shortened 80
meter
> dipole/inverted vee (80 ft) is versus the advertised "full size" 80m
dipoles of
> 130 ft or so? The highest I can get the apex of the dipole/inverted vee
is 50
> ft. (I have a TriEx WT51 with a Mosley Classic 33 WARC (the the 40m kit on
the
> driven element) on top. The reason for investigating the shortened
dipole/vee is
> my lot is just 100X150 Any help appreciated, or would I be doing better
by
> putting up a vertical?
>
> Tom, WW5L
> Colleyville, Texas
>
>
> List Sponsored by AN Wireless: AN Wireless handles Rohn tower systems,
> Trylon Titan towers, coax, hardline and more. Also check out our self
> supporting towers up to 96 feet for under $1500!!
http://www.anwireless.com
>
> -----
> FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
> Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
> Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
> Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
>
List Sponsored by AN Wireless: AN Wireless handles Rohn tower systems,
Trylon Titan towers, coax, hardline and more. Also check out our self
supporting towers up to 96 feet for under $1500!! http://www.anwireless.com
-----
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
|