I have no separate RX antennas here. Still, I believe I have parity between TX
and RX performance, at least at my 500W power level.
Generally speaking, I think I have a reasonably quiet location and despite
having two acres, the siting of my house, an existing tower, the TX vertical and
neighb
On 12/18/2020 3:30 PM fmoeves wrote:
BillyI would guess it's about 50' - 60'.I will measure it when I get a chance. Most of my antennas are to close to each other on a on a slope. You work with what you have. 73 Fred KB4QZH
Original message From: Billy Cox D
Well to try and reply to some of the comments . . . (and apologies that I am
repeating myself, but clearly some haven't read all my posts on this
subject)
I'm certainly NOT trying to suggest that a decent Vertical isn't a good DX
antenna for 160m.
And my own observations certainly show that a d
To: Fred Moeves Subject: Re:
Topband: Low Dipoles Good Afternoon Fred,Might I ask how close your K9AY loop
is to your Inverted L please?Pondering if it is worth doing here, as the
spacing will be close.TU!Merry Christmas and Happy New Year,Billy, AA4NU> On
12/18/2020 12:57 PM Fred Moeves wrote
Hi Roger,
Like the others, I never once thought that you were lying. Respectfully,
could you please tell us a little more about your dipole, tower, etc.? For
example:
- How is the dipole oriented?
- How is it fed?
- Are you near a body of water?
- Could there possibly be some vertically-polar
On 12/18/2020 4:28 AM, Rob Atkinson wrote:
I invite you to come to the middle
of North America, Nebraska let's say, and set up the exact same
antenna in a rural location and report how it performs after a full
winter operating season.
Or to Northern California, and report on how many EU station
tical system is less than a quarter wave high it puts additional pressure
on the ground system to be even better. As per Lewis, Brown Epstein. 73
Clive GM3POI
-Original Message-
From: Topband On Behalf Of
Mike Tessmer K9NW
Sent: 18 December 2020 14:40
To: topband@contesting.com
Subje
quot;K4SAV"
To: topband@contesting.com
Sent: Friday, December 18, 2020 4:48:20 PM
Subject: Re: Topband: Low Dipoles
On 12/18/2020 10:18 AM, Mike Waters wrote:
> A few words of wisdom about 160m antennas from W8JI, ON4UN and others...
>
> https://web.archive.org/web/20180815141931/h
On 12/18/2020 10:18 AM, Mike Waters wrote:
A few words of wisdom about 160m antennas from W8JI, ON4UN and others...
https://web.archive.org/web/20180815141931/http://w0btu.com/160_meters.html
After you read W8JI's comments, put these two antennas on EZNEC. It
will say the dipole smokes the v
Well said, Clive! :-)
On Fri, Dec 18, 2020, 9:10 AM wrote:
> All antennas work, some better than others, a choice of one maybe not
> ideal.
> * Without an A/B comparison impossible to judge* and I would add if any
> vertical system is less than a quarter wave high it puts additional
> pressure
>
A few words of wisdom about 160m antennas from W8JI, ON4UN and others...
https://web.archive.org/web/20180815141931/http://w0btu.com/160_meters.html
73 Mike
W0BTU
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
I read a comment some while ago that our impressions of what is required for
our low bands is distorted by the original works done in the 30s for medium
wave broadcast transmitters in USA, in that, broadcast needs are different
because they are servicing a "local" population and thus need a high
. 73
Clive GM3POI
-Original Message-
From: Topband On Behalf Of
Mike Tessmer K9NW
Sent: 18 December 2020 14:40
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Low Dipoles
Sometimes stuff just works.
73, Mike K9NW
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Sometimes stuff just works.
73, Mike K9NW
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
PleaseNebraska would be too easy as the propagation is quite good there.
Try central Minnesota and trust me the only EU stations worked will be just
a few in mid to late December.
This is 50 years of me operating from Minnesota speaking with a rather good
160 transmit antenna.
Thank you Rob for
> I do take offence at people suggesting that I am somehow lying about the
> results I have always had with a 160m Dipole at 50ft !
I don't think anyone believes you are lying, but perhaps instead, that
you seem to imply that your experience can be generalized and that you
are therefore, misguided
On 12/17/2020 1:27 PM, Roger Kennedy wrote:
I do take offence at people suggesting that I am somehow lying about the
results I have always had with a 160m Dipole at 50ft !
I don't see where anyone is saying you're lying, Roger.
In terms of people doing their own DIRECT comparisons against a
I do take offence at people suggesting that I am somehow lying about the
results I have always had with a 160m Dipole at 50ft !
Several people on this Forum have already stated how my current Signal on
160m compares favourably with other regular British DXers, all of whom use
decent Vertical Ant
On 12/17/2020 12:28 PM, Mike Smith VE9AA wrote:
I've had low (30-40' up) 160m dipoles in essentially 3 QTH's.and always had
inverted L's to do A/B realtime comparisons.
I'd define a dipole as "low" if it were less than 1/4 wavelength; I had
one at 120 ft, less than a quarter wave. The virtue o
I've had low (30-40' up) 160m dipoles in essentially 3 QTH's.and always had
inverted L's to do A/B realtime comparisons.
.Here up on a good sized hill (660'ASL), rocky excuse for soil. (14+
yrs)
.At previous QTH, 30' ASL, wet swampy soil in most directions. (12+
yrs)
.
the propagated
sum of zillions of Asia power leaks was not trivial. the dipole helped with that as it did not hear the
lower angle noise sources
Robin
- Original Message -
From:
To:
Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2020 10:03
Subject: Re: Topband: Low Dipoles
I have a "reall
I have a "really low" NVIS dipole that is at 40ft elevation - ends at 20 ft.
I put it up for very local communication and to experiment with DX angles.
I have only found it to be "okay" at sunset to maybe 30 - 45 mins after,
where, at times, its equal to my 2 el T top phased array to EU. Its N
I don't know what you used on 75 meters but I worked you on SSB with an
inverted-vee up only 45 feet at the apex and just a few feet at the ends. I
worked my first 80 countries on 160 using the same antenna with some extensions
on the ends.
Wes N7WS
On 12/14/2020 3:24 PM, m.r.c. wrote:
At
transmit on that antenna.
Robin
WA6CDR
XZ0A-XZ1N-VP6DX
- Original Message -
From: "Bill Tippett"
To: "topband"
Sent: Monday, December 14, 2020 05:31
Subject: Re: Topband: Low Dipoles
W3LPL wrote:
"I've never found them to be more effective receiving ant
I am all for multiple receiving antennas for 160..
I have:
1) Hi-Z 8 down by the creek.
2) Hi-Z 2 up on the hill.
3) BOG to NW going down the hill.
4) Waller FLAG on 40 foot boon (2 loops) at 95 feet on a TIC Ring Rotor.
The Waller FLAG appears to outperform all of the others (especially
On 12/14/2020 9:44 AM, donov...@erols.com wrote:
Bill's excellent: "You can never have too many antennas!"
For 160M contests, N6RO patches many components of his extensive antenna
farm to the operating desk for use as RX antennas.
is often quoted with my important corollary:
"unless they
uot;
which they all too often do...
73
Frank
W3LPL
- Original Message -
From: "Bill Tippett"
To: "topband"
Sent: Monday, December 14, 2020 1:31:40 PM
Subject: Re: Topband: Low Dipoles
W3LPL wrote:
"I've never found them to be more effectiv
W3LPL wrote:
"I've never found them to be more effective receiving antennas than Beverages
or arrays of short verticals at sunset or at any time during the night"
I have a inverted-V with apex at 100' and ends at 30' that I specifically
put up for high angle conditions. I also have a quasi-4SQ Tx
Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2020 10:55:47 AM
Subject: Re: Topband: Low Dipoles
On 12/12/2020 2:53 AM, Jim Brown wrote:
> I fully agree with observations that DX can arrive at higher angles.
I should have added that low dipoles can be better RX antennas for high
angle arrivals, since
Growing up, Jim Lawson W2PV (SK) was my local antenna mentor. He addressed 80m
dipoles for DX in a conversation with me one day with the following statement,
paraphrasing Jim, "If you can't put up a more elaborate or directional antenna
for 80, just use a high dipole, say 120 feet or so. It re
Hi Dave,
Indeed you are correct. Sorry about that.
However, broadside I still see a 4.5 dB advantage to the vertical, but of
course this can vary wildly up OR down depending on ground quality in the near
field for efficiency and the far-field of the vertical.
A new plot showing both Zenith, and A
On 12/12/2020 2:53 AM, Jim Brown wrote:
I fully agree with observations that DX can arrive at higher angles.
I should have added that low dipoles can be better RX antennas for high
angle arrivals, since efficiency doesn't matter on RX, but it matters a
LOT on TX.
73, Jim K9YC
__
On 12/11/2020 6:28 PM, donov...@erols.com wrote:
While there are always isolated cases when horizontal antennas
might be the best transmitting antenna, in my experience they're
isolated cases, usually occurring near sunrise.
Some years ago, I did a disciplined modeling study of horizontal dipol
: Re: Topband: Low Dipoles
Several topbanders have had both horizontal dipoles at various heights
-- including both very low and very high -- and high performing vertical
antennas that we could compare on the air in real time.
While there are always isolated cases when horizontal antennas might
The radiation pattern plot shows the dipole end on. Rotate azimuth 90
degrees and the two antennas show the same gain at 30 deg elevation.
Dave KH6AQ
On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 10:51 AM VE6WZ_Steve wrote:
> I know this thread has gone on-and-on-and on, but I felt I needed to add
> to the discu
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 8:51:19 PM
Subject: Topband: Low Dipoles
I know this thread has gone on-and-on-and on, but I felt I needed to add to the
discussion.
Regarding Roger G3YRO's 50 years of TB experience using a low dipole, I feel I
need to support his observation from the DX si
sting.com
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 10:17:39 PM
Subject: Re: Topband: Low Dipoles
Saying 160 propagation is complicated is an understatement. Otherwise
someone would have already figured this stuff out. One other
contributor that has to be added to the mix is the effect of Earth's
el
Yes Steve, I have a big custom 160m choke right at the feedpoint of my
Dipole . . even if I didn't, most of the feeder runs horizontally in my loft
at right angles to the dipole.
Thank you for your comments regarding my Signal on 160, and I think most
people I work regularly would say the same.
Saying 160 propagation is complicated is an understatement. Otherwise
someone would have already figured this stuff out. One other
contributor that has to be added to the mix is the effect of Earth's
electron gyrofrequency,. NEC knows nothing about this effect. It's
also a function of where
I know this thread has gone on-and-on-and on, but I felt I needed to add to the
discussion.
Regarding Roger G3YRO's 50 years of TB experience using a low dipole, I feel I
need to support his observation from the DX side.
This winter season since August I have had 56 QSOs with the UK, and worked
40 matches
Mail list logo
