Hi
This is a little off topic, but I don't know of a better place to
find someone that would know the answer to my question.
Many years ago I used one coax to feed three different inverted V
antennas all for different bands. At the time I thought they worked
just fine. Worked all kinds of dx with t
I've been expecting that there might be some objection to this thread due to
the subject, BUT THANKS to whom ever is holding the button. I have really
enjoyed the discussion and all the comments!! Thanks guys. 73 Mike K4ELV
___
Elecraft mailing li
Mike,
I suspect that the moderator realizes that antennas ... all kinds
of antennas ... are of more than passing interest to QRP-oriented
folks who are interested in getting most ERP from our low powered
(Elecraft) radios. (:-))
73! Ken Kopp - K0PP
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Yes, you CAN put multiple dipoles on one feedline.
It's commonly done in the government and/or commercial
world. It's often referred to as a "fan dipole". The feedline
can be either coax or open wire/TV twinlead.
Picture two telephone poles (or towers) with the support
points for the individual
6
KX1 #1499
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ken Kopp
Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 4:41 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] wire antennas
Yes, you CAN put multiple dipoles on one feedline.
It'
Scott,
I use 'fanned dipoles' fed with a common coax - yes a balun is highly
recommended.
The secret to fanned dipoles is to get the ends as far apart as possible so
they do not interact. Expect some interaction in any case, and tune them
from the lowest band first.
I have tried 5 bands - in a
On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 22:41:24 -, Ken Kopp wrote:
>Picture two telephone poles (or towers) with the support
>points for the individual dipoles several feet apart vertically
>along the two poles/towers.
>Such an arrangement is sometimes seen at a National Guard
>armory or Civil Defense center.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has anyone ever done any testing with multiple antennas on one
feedline to see if they really do pick up extra noise?
Hm, nobody answered this. My feeling (and it's not based on experiments)
is that it would normally not be a problem. For example, if you have an
80 a
In a message dated 2/19/07 4:45:23 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> have been told
> lately that the unused antennas on the setup would pick up additional
> noise.
If so, it will also pick up additional signal.
> Has anyone ever done any testing with multiple antennas on
If paralleled dipoles for different bands on a single feed line are called a
"fan dipole" it's a misnomer that can cause a lot of confusion. Sometimes
folks pick up short-hand term by accident, like assuming that a dipole is
always fed at the center to be a "dipole" when, in fact, a dipole is a
hal
Scott:
I use several fan dipoles. Both use two elements. One operates on 40
and 30 meters (and I get 15 meters, 3rd harmonic of 40, free into
the bargain, but the SWR is a bit above 2 on 15 m, and I must use
tuner to match it to the K2. ). The other antenna operates on 80 and
20 meters (and
Jim's another OT like me when all the HF Ham bands were
harmonically-related. Paralleled dipoles worked quite well in that setup
although there was a fair bit of interaction, especially from an 80 meter
dipole on a paralleled 10 meter dipole. I still recall one summer day
running my antenna up and
In a message dated 2/19/07 7:00:22 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> A "fan dipole" is a single-band affair. It's is a way of broadening the
> bandwidth of a single-band dipole by simulating a "fat" wire using multiple
> wires. Typically the wires join at an apex at the cente
On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 17:54:25 -0500, Don Wilhelm wrote:
>3 bands is about my limit.
Yes -- beyond that, they get both electrically and mechanically unwieldy.
>One other point - do not try to combind bands that are close to the 3rd
>harmonic of the lower one on the same coax - that too will drive
Stuart wrote:
>Even simpler is a 80m dipole fed with balanced line to a tuner for all band
>use. The window line is less costly than coax. A good quality tuner is
>less lossy in multiband use than coax/ tuner balun, etc.. Balanced antennas
>have fewer problems than off center feeds. Balanced l
ioned the
G5RV and its derivatives, yet.
David
G3UNA
- Original Message -
From: "Mike Morrow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 11:50 PM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] wire antennas
Stuart wrote:
Even simpler is a 80m dipole fed with balanced line to
Mike Morrow wrote:
What these types of
antennas show is that, no matter how bad an antenna design is, it'll
work sometimes. TANSTAAFL!
Has anyone seen the "Illuminator" from Tom Schiller, N6BT, of Force 12 fame?
Fred K6DGW
- Northern California Contest Club
- CU in the 2007 CQP Oct 6-7
- www
trying to align the antenna for
specific coverage.
Ron AC7AC
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Cutter
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 4:14 PM
To: Mike Morrow; elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] wire antennas
I alw
I am very much enjoying reading the discussions on wire antennas. I
have something I have been trying to figure out how to do for some time,
and thought this might be a good place to ask.
I have an 80m loop, up about 60 or 70 feet. Currently it is fed with
300 ohm line. All I could find at
Dave,
As far as switching your loop to a 160 top loaded vertical, yes you can do
it remotely with relays and a matching network. If your goal is efficiency
on 160 meters, the relay switching os only a small part of the equation -
you must have a good RF ground for the vertical to work against, an
-
From: "David Wilburn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 8:07 PM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] wire antennas
I am very much enjoying reading the discussions on wire antennas. I have
something I have been trying to figure out how to do for some time, and
thought
Yea, that is what has been keeping me away from 160m. I have several on
going projects, and I can't start one of that magnitude now. Might have
room for a dipole, so will just have to try that. Once I order some
ladder line.
David Wilburn
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Don Wilhelm wrote:
Dave,
As f
o you will not
have to worry about the ground losses you would have feeding it against
ground (unless using lots of radials).
Don K7FJ
- Original Message - From: "David Wilburn"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 8:07 PM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] wire
than relays and switches, but Don's good suggestion might
be the preferred solution for you.
GL...Rick -- W5RH
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 23:47:33 -0500
From: "Don Wilhelm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: [Elecraft] wire antennas
To: "David Wilburn" <[EMAIL PR
If I disconnected one side of the loop from balun, at that point (at
least from what I have looked at on the web) it is similar to an
inverted L with the wire wondering around instead of going off in one
direction like it should. At that point, an inverted L would need
radials. Problem is, th
x27;s good suggestion might
be the preferred solution for you.
GL...Rick -- W5RH
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 23:47:33 -0500
From: "Don Wilhelm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: [Elecraft] wire antennas
To: "David Wilburn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Message-ID: &l
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If I disconnected one side of the loop from balun, at that point (at
least from what I have looked at on the web) it is similar to an
inverted L with the wire wondering around instead of going off in one
direction like it should. At that poi
Dave,
Open it at the point 180 degrees (midway around) from the feedpoint. If
your existing loop is a full wavelength on 80 meters, opening it will turn
the loop into a folded back 1/2 wave dipole on 160 meters - not as good as
straight out, but it should work since you are feeding the line with
That is definitely getting interesting. So I want to block 160m from
going through, but pass 80m and above. Does that sound do able? With
the number of people that run horizontal loops you would think this
would be going on more.
David Wilburn
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Don Wilhelm wrote:
Dave,
How low did you have your horizontal loop? We always use a 2 wave or so one
for field day, (80m), but mostly use it on 40m and up to 15m. It is always
only 20 feet high, as that is the limit of reach of our portable ladder.
We get great signal reports, and work all over the country from the Ce
Mike and the group,
I am currently routing heavy duty 300 ohm twin lead from a 5/8 leg 20m
antenna, thru a slot cut into some foam pipe insulation that acts as a panel
in the bottom of a aluminum sash window. The window has aluminum sill, and
frame, and individual panes of glass with aluminum s
After contemplating it a bit, I would say that it is 75 to 80 feet up.
I had a similar one at my previous house up about 90 feet. It worked
great. I broke more than one pileup while barefoot. I'm hoping this
one works better after I get some 450 ohm ladder line on it. The both
have tuned ve
Reference to Mike's, K4ELV, comments about this being off topic, I apologize
to the list for diving off into further loop theory discussion. Sorry.
Rick - W5RH
___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to p
___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
I highly recommend a simple marconi (or top loaded
vertical, TEE, Etc.) for 160, even if you can only put
down short radials.
I have one hanging from my mast, about 48' vertical
and have managed WAS and 75 countries running 100W.
Running QRP I have around 35 states and 10 DXCC. No
Asia yet, but I
Rick:
No need to apologize. Your comments are right on target for this reflector.
If some feel otherwise, there is always the delete key, or they can
unsubscribe.
Keep them coming.
Paul N8NOV
Houston
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.441 /
No need for anyone to apologize for discussing antennas on this reflector
because they are the 'secret' to successful communications especially when
doing QRP imho - 72 Bruce.
72/73 - Bruce ve5rc/ve5qrp - QRP-C#1, QRP-L#886, A1 Operator
Enter QRP-Canada's "RUN with RAC" contest -
Paul Rubin wrote:
Rick:
No need to apologize. Your comments are right on target for this reflector.
If some feel otherwise, there is always the delete key, or they can
unsubscribe.
Keep them coming.
Paul N8NOV
Houston
I second Paul. I'll read any post about antennas that make my Elecr
I third that!
Antennas is the name of the game.
And no need to apologize, you were right on topic!
Ron, wb1hga
"Elmer the inquisitive"
Fred Jensen wrote:
Paul Rubin wrote:
Rick:
No need to apologize. Your comments are right on target for this
reflector.
If some feel otherwise, there is al
I enjoy putting together and playing with simple wire antennas for field
operations. I have also been fortunate to enjoy moderate success with my
efforts.
However I am looking to refine my approach in an effort to make my systems more
efficient. My approach in the past has been to follow de
Hi, Chuck.
I usually don't add the transmission line in the EZNEC model, just the
source. I then take the source data for the frequency of interest and
plug it into this tool where I can play around with different kinds of
feedline, add a balun, calculate optimal feedline lenghts, etc:
http://ww
I do the same as Martin writes.
Modeling transmission lines with Eznec is difficult for me...
You could also use TLA by N6BV.
72,
--
___
Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way:
Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com
Powered by Outblaze
__
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
I have read several articles and books on antenna building but have missed
anything that addresses this aspect of antenna construction. That is not to
say that it hasn’t been discussed only that I have not seen it.
You might benefit from a visit to the DX Engine
Chuck, K2CG wrote:
I enjoy putting together and playing with simple wire antennas for field
operations. I have also been fortunate to enjoy moderate success with my
efforts.
However I am looking to refine my approach in an effort to make my systems
more efficient. My approach in the past has
44 matches
Mail list logo
