Thanks another option for low bands
________________________________
From: CQ-Contest <cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com> on behalf of Gerry Hull
<gerry@yccc.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2017 8:03:17 AM
To: Steve London
Cc: Chuck Dietz; CQ Contest
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Time to QSY?
Best single-element, 160 compromise antenna I've used at many QTHs is the
so-called K2KQ Double-L. (http://www.yccc.org/Articles/double_l.htm)
Balanced, no radials required, vertical polarization with the current point
up fairly high, and very easy to make, so no huge investment to try it out.
73, Gerry W1VE
On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Steve London <n2icarrl@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hah !
>
> Sit in my shoes, on a dry, rocky mountaintop in SW New Mexico, with poor
> dielectric and conductivity characteristics. Essentially, no soil - just
> rocks.
>
> I have tried a number of single-element 160 antennas over the years, with
> less-than-satisfying results. I evaluate each of them by the percentage of
> EU stations that CQ in my face on a good Europe night.
>
> A marked difference from my previous Colorado QTH, which had a 1/4 wave
> sloper over flat, irrigated farm land.
>
> You can get away with some pretty poor transmit antennas on 160 if you
> have good ground characteristics under them. For poor ground, lots of
> radials somewhat, but not entirely, mitigates the problem.
>
> 73,
> Steve, N2IC
>
>
>
> On 03/17/2017 04:57 PM, Chuck Dietz wrote:
>
>> I use a 1/4 wave sloper on 160 with the top at about 130 feet on a 155
>> foot
>> tower. I have a receiving array, but I have never heard any 160m station I
>> could not contact. East coast stations tell me I have EU pile ups I can't
>> hear after I have worked all the loud ones. I think transmit antennas are
>> easy. It is the receive antennas that are a problem.
>>
>> Chuck W5PR
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 2:53 PM Wes Jennings <wjennings2011@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Steve as you know I am setting up here also. 4 sq on 40m - 2multi band
>>> verts for 80 phased. And inverted l for 160. Now on a small city lot my
>>> old
>>> elmer had KLM tribander, 2ele 40m beam, shunt fed the tower for 160,80
>>> with
>>> beverages that fit in the lot. Did real well on that setup
>>>
>>> Wes
>>> WL7F
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: CQ-Contest <cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com> on behalf of
>>> Stephen
>>> Bloom <sbloom@acsalaska.net>
>>> Sent: Friday, March 17, 2017 2:43:28 PM
>>> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
>>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Time to QSY?
>>>
>>> I'll throw this out there ...
>>>
>>> 80M and 160M antennas!
>>>
>>> Most of us probably know the theory, but I want to know what has actually
>>> worked and hasn't ..and ..why
>>>
>>> Competitively, at this point in the cycle, we're gonna live and die on
>>> the
>>> low bands. For the most part, 40M and below, we know it's some variation
>>> on
>>> heavy metal high in the air .. for 80 and 160M, I'm curious, and I bet
>>> others are too about
>>>
>>> 1) For the "big guns" and those trying to be, what are you doing? Are
>>> any
>>> of you having success with 80M yagis, and if so, how are you keeping them
>>> in
>>> the air and on the air? For 80M and 160M, 4 square arrays? 4 "tower
>>> verticals" or Dipole arrays off a single tower? 2 phased verticals?
>>> Receiving antennas? How do you keep Moose from ravaging your Beverages?
>>> (OK, maybe that is an Alaska only problem!)
>>>
>>> 2) For the people on smaller lots. Suggestions, ways to improve
>>> performance realistically.
>>>
>>> Thanks/73
>>> Steve KL7SB
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
>>> K1AR via CQ-Contest
>>> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 1:08 PM
>>> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
>>> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Time to QSY?
>>>
>>> OK everyone -- unless someone has something new and profound to offer, I
>>> suggest we move on to a new thread. How about a discussion on leveling
>>> the
>>> playing field in contesting? Or, perhaps the impact of spotting, RBN and
>>> packet on contest operating? Maybe we can debate the merits of combining
>>> assisted and unassisted.
>>>
>>> NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>>
>>> Something new folks? Anything? Please?
>>>
>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>> 73, John, K1AR
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
>> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|