jim Jarvis wrote:
> k9ay observed that vertical dipoles weren't very good antennas...
>
> When challenged by EI7BA, he observed that his 40m inverted vee
> @ 120' outperformed a vertical dipole with its top at the same height.
>
> I'm sure that's true, but it's a very different animal than EI7BA's
> 160m vertical dipole
> with only 55' of it running vertical.
>
> Both Jim and John's experiences are valid. They're just talking
> about different
> animals.
Hi Jim..
You're right of course.. Perhaps we can modify Jim K9YC's original
statement and say that...
A vertical dipole suspended at a point approximately one
wavelength over ground is not as effective as an inverted V at the same
height for DX. However, A loaded vertical dipole at one eighth, to one
quarter wavelength at it's highest point, is more effective than an
inverted V at the same height for DX.
Then we can call it a draw... {;o)
John EI7BA
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|