At 06:09 AM 7/5/2005, Roger Parsons wrote:
>My experience (admittedly really limited to 160m) is
>that it is pretty easy to get ~50% efficiency. It is
>pretty hard to get close to 100%.
>
>My justification for saying this is that at one point
>I had an inverted L (in a tree) with about a 50'
>vertical section fed against a few poor radials. I
>also had a 95' top loaded vertical fed against >150
>long radials about 400' feet from the inverted L. The
>difference between the two was certainly well less
>than 6dB. I also had a 300' vertical at my remote site
>(about 7 miles away) fed against 120 x 1000' radials.
>No great difference between that and the 95' vertical,
>although the DX characteristics were a bit different.
>
>Quite depressing really!
Or, perhaps, an incentive to do a "system design", especially for portable
ops. You might be better off with a big amp and a crummy antenna than
barefoot and a good antenna that takes hours to set up.
For a permanent installation, you could have both the good antenna AND the
big amp.
>73 Roger
>VE3ZI
>
>
>
>
>___________________________________________________________
>How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday
>snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com
>_______________________________________________
>
>See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless
>Weather Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with
>any questions and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
>
>_______________________________________________
>TowerTalk mailing list
>TowerTalk@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
_______________________________________________
See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather
Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any questions
and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|