Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] Half sloper recommedations needed

To: <rlvz@aol.com>, <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Half sloper recommedations needed
From: "Gene Fuller" <w2lu@rochester.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 2010 18:04:24 -0500
List-post: <towertalk@contesting.com">mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
Hi Dick -

I can just tell you my experience.  I"m using 3 quarterwave slopers from a 
100 foot tower on 160. A rely box at the top of the tower selects which of 
the three is on the coax. Coax shield is connected to the top of tower. 
Since it's about 200 feet from the tower to the station I have a "line 
flattener" at the base of the tower tunerd for best SWR at the station.- 
Also switching from RG-213 comming down the tower to 75 ohm hard line to the 
station). I made no attempt to tune/resonate the sloper. Although the "F/B" 
ratio may only be a very few db I figure it's worth it to have more than 
one. Wouldn't you think it was great if you could have 4 or 5 KW instead of 
1.5  for the price of an extra wire and a relay ???  Since I have 3 bent 
halfwaves on 80 ( operated as one driven and two reflectors) I have 3 
quarterwaves on 160 (140 feet each) placed between the 80m halfwaves. Bottom 
line - both the 160m quarterwaves and the 80m halfwaves seem to work very 
well. I really don't know if my 7-60 MHz  LP on the top of the tower is in 
the picture. The 40 foot 160m slopers are probably somewhat acting as 
aditional reflectors on 80. They were originally installed as 80 m 
reflectors when what are now 80m bent vertical dipoles were actually 80m 
sloping dipoles. Running the bottom half of the sloping dipoles back towards 
the bottom of the tower was VERY worthwhile - canceled the horizontal 
component bringing the rad angle from 28 down to 18 degrees. One driven and 
two reflectors is only good for about 4 dbi but the 18 degree takeoff more 
than makes up for the low gain.

Good luck with whatever you wind up  with.

Gene / W2LU


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <rlvz@aol.com>
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 31, 2009 4:27 PM
Subject: [TowerTalk] Half sloper recommedations needed


> Hi Guys-
>
> I'd appreciate your recommendations on building a Half Sloper for  160-m.
> I realize that some folk have had excellent results with Half  Slopers and
> others have had terrible results with them!  That's why I'm  asking for
> advise on how to construct my Half Sloper!
>
> Question 1: Most antenna articles say when constructing an Inv. Vee is  to
> keep the minimum angle between wires at 90 degrees or greater.  Since 
> Half
> Slopers almost never have a 90 degree angle between the sloper wire and 
> the
> tower is this one reason why many Half Slopers don't work very well... 
> lots
> of signal cancellation?
>
> Question 2: I have a 90' tower with a Tribander on top which makes it very
> close to a 1/4 wave for 160-m.  I installed an Inverted L on this  tower
> with 85' vertical and the Inv. L radiating efficiency is very  poor due to
> heavy coupling between the Inverted L and the  tower.  (some models say 
> that
> alot of RF is shorted right to  ground!)  Therefore, I am thinking of 
> going
> with a Half Sloper  connected near the top of the 90' tower with the 
> sloper
> wire running  NE towards Europe.  If I anchor the end of the sloper wire 
> about
> 200' from  the tower the angle is only going to be about 45 degrees.  Do
> you think  this will work any better towards Europe than my heavily 
> coupled
> and inefficient  Inv. L?  (another weakness with my Inv. L is that I have 
> a
> minimal  radial system as it must be pulled up each Spring).
>
> Question 3: Rather than build the Half Sloper on the 90' tower  would an
> Inv. L on my 60' tower with 55' vertical and the rest horizontal  running 
> NE
> towards Europe likely outperform the Half Sloper at 90' towards  Europe...
> keeping in mind that this is a temporary antenna so I can only  put down a
> minimal radial system as the radials need to be removed  in Spring.
>
> I realize that I'm likely to get a variety of opinions on this and that is
> fine!  Please let me know which of the above options you believe  is most
> likely to provide the best 160-m. signal towards Europe.
>
> Happy New Year!
>
> 73,
> Dick- K9OM
> Edgewater, Florida
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk 

_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>