TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] Vertical Dipole "Fringe Benefits"

To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Vertical Dipole "Fringe Benefits"
From: "Scott Harwood" <scotth@hsc.edu>
Reply-to: scotth@hsc.edu,Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 09:35:25 -0400
List-post: <mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
Heck, I also got interested & ordeed the Force 12 Sigma 5 (3-5 week delay in 
shipping due to demand).  If anyone is interested it's on sale ($90 off) 
through July 22nd.
Scott K4VWK
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: Robert & Linda McGraw K4TAX <RMcGraw@Blomand.Net>
Reply-To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date:  Wed, 13 Jul 2005 08:08:25 -0500

>I agree.  All this discussion, while not directly Tentec related, has got me 
>to thinking about putting up a vertical dipole.
>
>73
>Bob, K4TAX
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>
>To: "'Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment'" <tentec@contesting.com>
>Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 4:59 AM
>Subject: [TenTec] Vertical Dipole "Fringe Benefits"
>
>
>> Ten-Tec is my first love in radio equipment, that's why I'm on this
>> reflector.
>>
>>
>>
>> I guess it's time for Ten-Tec to release a new product because we haven't
>> seen much complaining here for quite some time now (hi).
>>
>>
>>
>> Until then, I am enjoying these antenna discussions.
>>
>>
>>
>> THE VERTICAL DIPOLE AND 80m SURPRISE: DX better than on the full size
>> dipole.(often)
>>
>>
>>
>> I put up the vertical dipole for the first time ever in 1993 when I moved
>> into my previous QTH, which didn't have much ground space.
>>
>> I took it down once I got the beam and openwire fed horizontal dipole up.
>>
>>
>>
>> Here at the new QTH I use the vertical dipole everyday, though each side 
>> is
>> now 1m longer than it was at the previous QTH.
>>
>>
>>
>> I have had horizontal dipoles (dublets) fed with openwire at my last 3
>> locations.
>>
>> Each was a different size, based on the space I had available.
>>
>> All were about the same height: 13m (40 ft.).
>>
>> They were: 2x 20m (now, used 6 years), 2x 10m previously (used 7 years), 
>> and
>> 2x 13m (used 5 years)
>>
>>
>>
>> The first interesting question might be, how did these 3 compare?
>>
>> Hey, this is about as subjective as it gets, because they were used during
>> different times, different sunspot cycles and at different locations.
>>
>>
>>
>> My highly subjective gut feeling, for 40m and above, all performed about
>> equally well.
>>
>> For 80m, the 2x13m performed about the same as the 2x20m and the 2x10m was
>> noticeably weaker.  This is based on my ability to work multis in contests
>> with the first or second call, as well as the day to day reports I got in 
>> my
>> 80m skeds.
>>
>>
>>
>> Now the surprise.  I have always tried to orient these horizontal antennas
>> such that I could have the major lobe facing stateside, and as a result,
>> working Asiatic Russia has always been a real challenge.  In contests, I
>> could hear those guys 599 for hours but simply couldn't work them.
>> Eventually I would snag one but the time wasted wasn't helping my contest
>> score.
>>
>>
>>
>> At the last QTH, 2x10m, I pulled the openwire feedline out of the Annecke
>> and stuck just one side of it into an MFJ Differential-T.  My only ground
>> was the cold water pipe. I had no radials or counterpoise.  This was a 
>> panic
>> effort in the middle of a CQWW to try and work UK9/0.  Hey, I worked it in 
>> a
>> relatively short time.  This tells me the radiation pattern of the
>> "Inverted-L" which I had converted my horizontal dipole into was more
>> favorable for the east  in that configuration than in the classical dipole
>> configuration.  Remember, I had already taken down my vertical dipole and
>> didn't have it.
>>
>>
>>
>> Here at the new QTH, I have the vertical dipole.  I found I can call for
>> hours using the horizontal dipole and still don't manage to work UK9/0 -
>> even with maximum legal power.  However, switching to the vertical dipole, 
>> I
>> can work them even with 100w with just a few calls.
>>
>>
>>
>> So two years ago, I worked a CQWW single band 80m from home and spent most
>> of the time just switching between antennas.  For transatlantic work it 
>> was
>> a wash.  One time the signal was louder on the horizontal (full size up
>> 13m), the next time it was louder on the vertical.  For working the 
>> European
>> multipliers, the horizontal was almost always a couple of S-units louder.
>> Asiatic Russia only worked on the Vertical Dipole.
>>
>>
>>
>> The following year (last year) I stayed home again for CQWW but didn't put
>> in a serious effort.  Still, I made another valuable experience.  On 40m,
>> the vertical dipole was almost always 1 S-Unit better than the 2x20m
>> horizontal on long-haul, but the big surprise was that for EU multipliers,
>> the vertical dipole was also stronger - almost always, except for the
>> countries which are very close to Bavaria.
>>
>>
>>
>> The Bottom Line:  It's sure nice to have two antennas instead of just one.
>> The vertical dipole is a significant enhancement to my station even on the
>> low bands, where I, for many years, only had a horizontal dipole.  This 
>> was
>> a pleasant surprise because I had initially put the vertical up for the 
>> high
>> bands.
>>
>>
>>
>> 73
>>
>> Rick
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TenTec mailing list
>> TenTec@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec 
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>TenTec mailing list
>TenTec@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
 


                   
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>