Using my completely anecdotal, un-analyzed and un-modeled experience, a 16 foot
high inverted v powered by 1500 watts allows me to work any 80m station I can
hear during November Sweepstakes from my QTH in NNY. This includes sections as
far away as SCV and WWA as well as NH, ME, WPA, NNJ and OH. For all I know, I'm
effectively running QRP at some of those distances, but for the 2 hours of
effort it took me to measure 120 some feet of wire, run a coax and screw an
eyelet into the fascia at the roof peak, it was worth it.
Al
AB2ZY
________________________________________
From: Kelly Taylor <ve4xt@mymts.net>
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2015 12:31 PM
To: Stephen Davis
Cc: towertalk@contesting.com; Al Kozakiewicz; Jim Brown
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Omnidirectional antenna for domestic contests. Re:
TowerTalk Digest, Vol 154, Issue 18
No arguing with results, however, I would point out that your 400 mile radius
will mean quite a different QSO count in a high-density amateur region such as
W1 than in other areas. A 400-mile radius from Carlisle covers quite a few more
hams than a 400-mile radius from Toronto, for instance. Plus, you’re getting
some help from the inverse square law, which means any inefficiency is less
important for 400-mile trips than for 2,000-mile trips.
If your signal is raining down on a lot of amateurs, you’ll work a lot of them.
But 400 miles just barely gets you from one end of North Dakota to the other.
Depending on where in Ontario the OP is located, 400 miles may not be enough to
get into the high-density regions, and even then, precludes the 2,168-mile trip
from Toronto to LA.
73, kelly
ve4xt
> On Oct 12, 2015, at 11:15 AM, Stephen Davis <sdavis@davisrf.com> wrote:
>
> I was indicating what my actual results are, regardless of what software
> indicates. Also, if I had looked at software first, I might still have done
> the NIVIS based on other practical experience noted by others in the research
> I did. Lastly, without software or others' experience, I still would have
> tried because my high water table (in the ground) is 2 - 2.5 ft below grade
> for a few months in late winter to spring, and otherwise right about 5.5 ft
> below grade (tested when required by town for building an addition, we are on
> wells and septics thus the requirement.) I only wish I had a way to add salt
> to the water HI.
> Hey, it works well for me, maybe not well for others and I don't disagree
> with Jim's assessment of the software results. And again, it is so easy to
> erect that maybe worth a try where you are.
>
> Steve K1PEK
>
>
>
> On Oct 12, 2015, at 12:00 PM, towertalk-request@contesting.com wrote:
>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>> 1. Re: Omnidirectional antenna for domestic contests. TowerTalk
>> Digest, Vol 154, Issue 16 (Al Kozakiewicz)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 14:15:42 +0000
>> From: Al Kozakiewicz <akozak@hourglass.com>
>> To: "towertalk@contesting.com" <towertalk@contesting.com>
>> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Omnidirectional antenna for domestic
>> contests. TowerTalk Digest, Vol 154, Issue 16
>> Message-ID: <1444659342663.92755@hourglass.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>> I'll see your argumentum ab auctoritate and raise you a post hoc ergo
>> propter hoc and a misleading vividness.
>>
>> Inefficient wasn't the criteria. Omnidirectionality was. I have an 80
>> meter inverted V hung from the peak of a one story segment of my house. The
>> peak is maybe at 16 or 20 feet.
>>
>> Compared to my very narrow banded vertical, it does quite well during
>> November Sweepstakes, which is the only time it is used. The horrific loss
>> makes it quite broad banded which I compensate for by running 1500 watts 8-)
>>
>> I'd call the results "good" if by results we're talking about QSOs in a
>> contest. On the other hand, if by results you mean ERP at various radiation
>> angles, probably not so much.
>>
>> Al
>> AB2ZY
>> ________________________________________
>> From: TowerTalk <towertalk-bounces@contesting.com> on behalf of Jim Brown
>> <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
>> Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2015 4:08 PM
>> To: towertalk@contesting.com
>> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Omnidirectional antenna for domestic contests.
>> TowerTalk Digest, Vol 154, Issue 16
>>
>> On Sun,10/11/2015 12:06 PM, Stephen Davis wrote:
>>> A very easy to put up, with good results to a distance of 400 miles (at
>>> least from here in MA) , omni directional , is a NIVIS.
>>
>> This is VERY wrong. See http://k9yc.com/VertOrHorizontal-Slides.pdf The
>> major characteristic of the very low dipole you describe is poor
>> efficiency at all vertical angles. The polar plot done by modeling
>> software makes it LOOK like its good at high angles, but it isn't --
>> most of the TX power is lost in the earth.
>>
>> 73, Jim K9YC
>>
>> 73, Jim K9YC
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|