Years ago I had a vertical dipole for 40 meters and a raised vertical with 3
radials 10 feet above the ground. The raised vertical was about 6 DB better
than the vertical dipole for European stations. The raised vertical was 10
feet off the ground at the bottom with 3 full size radials (33 feet long).
I like raised verticals.
Carl Moreschi N4PY
121 Little Bell Drive
Hays, NC 28635
----- Original Message -----
From: "Denton" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment" <email@example.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2011 9:43 PM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] New and Improved Terminology (NVIS origins)
>I had both a 32 ft vertical dipole and the same vertical dipole converted
> over to a 40 meter 1/4 wave ground plane with 4 elevated radials.
> In my case the performance very close to the same on 40 meters, minus the
> pita the radials were.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Richards" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> To: "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment" <email@example.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2011 6:36 PM
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] New and Improved Terminology (NVIS origins)
>> Do you claim your vertical dipole works better than a quarter wave with
>> four good, properly tuned/cut elevated radials?
>> Reason I ask is that my aluminum rotatable dipole project has technical
>> problems (The alum elements sag and dip and wave in the wind too much
>> -- I did not select sufficiently large diameter and stiff tubing.... but
>> ham radio is for experimenting, right...?) AND I was
>> thinking I could salvage the project by turning the floppy thing
>> vertical and make it a vertical dipole - OR - I might convert it into a
>> single tubing vertical elevated ground plane and add some wire radials.
>> Any traction ? (I will stick my neck out here... re: your
>> challenge... and expect the properly tuned elevated radials to equal the
>> work of the second half of the vertical dipole and say they should
>> perform equally well. N'est ce pas?)
>> ================== James - K8JHR ====================
>> On 1/5/2011 8:42 PM, Rick - NJ0IP / DJ0IP wrote:
>>> I have used the vertical dipole instead of the classical vertical
>>> my despise for radials.
>> > I still stand by my challenge for anyone to come up with a simple
>>> antenna that will out-perform the simple vertical dipole.
>> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec mailing list
TenTec mailing list