To: | "towertalk@contesting.com" <towertalk@contesting.com> |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: [TowerTalk] How Helically Wound Verticals Really Work (was : Vertical dipoles) |
From: | "Jim Brown" <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com> |
Date: | Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:12:23 -0800 |
List-post: | <towertalk@contesting.com">mailto:towertalk@contesting.com> |
On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 09:53:07 -0700, David Gilbert wrote: >Every time I ponder this it seems to me that capacitive end loading is >the better choice if proximity effects can be avoided. ;) YES! The problem, of course, is that you may need both, in which case I would use as much top loading as possible (multiple wires, longer) and add some inductance near the top of the vertical section if needed. This is my gut feeling, not based on modeling. 73, Jim K9YC _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing list TowerTalk@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk |
Previous by Date: | Re: [TowerTalk] Rohn catalog not free, WW3S |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [TowerTalk] How Helically Wound Verticals Really Work (was : Vertical dipoles), Roger (K8RI) |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [TowerTalk] How Helically Wound Verticals Really Work (was : Vertical dipoles), David Gilbert |
Next by Thread: | Re: [TowerTalk] How Helically Wound Verticals Really Work (was : Vertical dipoles), Steve Hunt |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |