If you use a center-fed vertical [like the Sigma 5 I have] you don't
need radials at all. It's just a half-wave dipole
stood up on end.
Much better than the old-fashioned quarter-wave vertical with all its
problems of ground losses.
Needs to be center loaded for 40 but 33 feet is a full half-wav
PM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Question about vertical and radial placement
>
> As several others have mentioned, I think you would be better served by a
> multiband vertical such as a Butterrnut, Hustler, HyGain, etc. As for the
> radials, elevated radials are clearly superior
As several others have mentioned, I think you would be better served by a
multiband vertical such as a Butterrnut, Hustler, HyGain, etc. As for the
radials, elevated radials are clearly superior to ground radials, as
demonstrated in the March QST. I also speak from personal experience as I
have
On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 16:17:50 -0800 (PST), djmd wrote:
See comments in line...
>I live in a very standard subdivision-type lot, about 180'x70' with a
>single-story 55'x25' house right in the middle. The one option that I have
>to rule out is putting the antenna smack-dab in the center of the bac
Buy, beg, borrow or ste ummm locate a copy of Les Moxon's, G6XN (SK),
book "HF Antennas
for All Locations". He provides some options that are worth considering. The
book covers a lot of possibilities for "small gardens", typical in the UK
and US.
Don't buy into the 43' vertical hype. It's a g
Look into the GAP Titan DX
I am using one now and very happy with it.
Will mount on your house nicely
Donald
--
View this message in context:
http://n2.nabble.com/Re-Elecraft-Question-about-vertical-and-radial-placement-tp4572504p4572542.html
Sent from the [OT] mailing list archive at
Contrary to expectations, your radials need not go anywhere near the ground.
If your antenna is on the roof then your radials should start at the feed
point and remain horizontal, and stay on the roof. They don't need to go
down to the ground and so they won't be visible (at least not compared to
You are likely to get a lot of ideas and comments, but a bit of study
will substantiate what I am about to say on the subject - it is all just
practical physics, no real 'magic' involved. (OK -- some theory from EE
Field Mechanics theory is involved too).
If you mount the 43 ft. vertical on th
Ugh, I can't win tonight! :) The suggestion was for a CP6A"R" which is still
available as far as I can tell. Looking into it right now...
--
View this message in context:
http://n2.nabble.com/Re-Elecraft-Question-about-vertical-and-radial-placement-tp4572504p4572514.html
Se
n if the bandwidth on 40m isn't great, that's
ok, as I failed to mention that I'm 90% CW, 9% PSK, and 1% SSB. Low power
also - 15w or so. I should probably also check out the other available
antennas that don't "require" radials.
--
View this message in context:
h
On 2/14/2010 4:17 PM, djmd wrote:
> Currently without any HF antenna and after seeing my friend's
> success with his homebuilt vertical, I'm starting to consider a
> self-supported 43' allbander, from DX-Engineering or the like.
> Not really looking to discuss general performance vs. other
> anten
With a wire running down to the radials, you would have something more like
an off center fed vertical dipole. The distance to ground would be near a
quarter wave for some bands. Heavy wire would not change that. Have you
considered going through the roof with a wire to a counterpoise in the
attic?
Hello,
Currently without any HF antenna and after seeing my friend's success with
his homebuilt vertical, I'm starting to consider a self-supported 43'
allbander, from DX-Engineering or the like. Not really looking to discuss
general performance vs. other antennas, but I am curious about my optio
13 matches
Mail list logo
