I guess I should have defined what I consider a short vertical, something
around 50' high and top loaded. If you had a support 50' high for your
inverted V you could have used it for a vertical and then loaded it with a
wire or wires configured as either an inverted L, T or just have the wires
come back toward the ground like tower guys. I would not expect a 20'
base loaded vertical to radiate well.
BTW one time I tried a kite at the water's edge while in Cayman Is,
unfortunately I only made a few QSOs before it dropped into the water. It
may be something fun to try at your QTH.
John KK9A
To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: [TowerTalk] Adding 160 to an 80M dipole?
From: RLVZ--- via TowerTalk <towertalk@contesting.com>
Reply-to: RLVZ@aol.com
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 13:46:34 -0500
For 160-m. I agree with John's statement below, unless the vertical is
real short and base loaded in which case I'd prefer a low Dipole or Inverted
Vee on if there's no better option such as a top loaded vertical, Shunt Fed
tower, or a Slant L. Example: one of the first year's I came to Florida, I
mounted a very short 20' base loaded vertical at the edge of a salt water
river that had line-of-sight over salt-water to a large area I was trying
to work. I also had a low Inverted Vee for 160-m. with apex at 50' and ends
at 20'. I thought the short vertical would do better on DX, but the short
vertical was down 10-20dB in every case.
73, Dick- K9OM
In a message dated 12/17/2014 10:22:52 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
john@kk9a.com writes:
I never had much success using a low dipole, even from the Caribbean. For
me a short vertical with a minimal ground system worked better and it used
much less real estate.
John KK9A
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|