I also concur with K9YC -- but with an addendum:
The only time I've heard an inv-V beat an inverted-L was for a ~10min
period just at grayline during a solar minimum. ON4UN and others have noted
this phenomenon. Note that the inv-V was at K1TTT and 180' up.
So, if your goal is to work DX for ten minutes or less once per day and
then only occasionally every decade, try a low inv-V.
Otherwise, try an inexpensive and reliable inv-L or a T. *grin*
YMMV (but probably not).
Mike N1TA
On Jan 25, 2018 12:23 PM, "Rob Atkinson" <ranchorobbo@gmail.com> wrote:
Jim Brown is correct. 160 m. is a medium wave band. HF antenna
wisdom does not apply. Of course those in denial will probably never
learn; the band is loaded with piss weakers who answer my CQs with
crappy antennas like inverted Vs, and wavelength low cloud burner
loops and dipoles which may work reasonably well on HF but are
relatively poor performers on 160.
Obviously brief assessments are general in nature--there are times of
the day and distances for which an antenna that is generally inferior,
will work well, but year in and year out, over varied conditions,
times and distances, the vertical series fed radiator over an
extensive ground system has been shown to be superior for
transmitting.
73
Rob
K5UJ
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
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
|