on the http://www.bencher.com web site is a very good
article called Dirty little Secrets about antennas.
It should be required reading if your considering a
vertical antenna. I've used both the hustler 5btv and
the Butternut 10-80m vertical with excellent results.
RC http://www.kc5wa.us
I'll throw one more option into the mix...
Lately I've been using one of Force 12's Sigma 40XK vertical dipoles.
This is about 16 feet tall, and since it's a center-fed dipole, it
supposedly doesn't *require* a counterpoise or radial system, so I've
been using it without one.
This particular
RC is right! If you have any questions (or interest) at all about verticals
then READ THIS. It is an island of sanity in a sea of bs.
Don K7FJ
on the http://www.bencher.com web site is a very good article called
Dirty little Secrets about antennas. It should be required reading if
your
be more realistic.
73, curt
- Original Message
From: RC kc5wa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Friday, March 2, 2007 12:07:58 PM
Subject: [Elecraft] re: vertical antenna
on the http://www.bencher.com web site is a very good
article called Dirty little Secrets
The Force 12 vertical dipoles are Excellent, and do not require radials, as
Cebik notes in his models of vertical dipoles. A dipole is complete unto
itself as a radiating antenna. In the far field , good RF earth can help
this one like any antenna with its far reflections, but up close to it, it
5 matches
Mail list logo
