TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] 160 M antenna

To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] 160 M antenna
From: "R. Eric Sluder - W9WLW" <resluder@yahoo.com>
Reply-to: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2013 19:08:15 -0500
List-post: <tentec@contesting.com">mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
There is an excellent article in QEX that I received in my mailbox today about this very topic. It compares 1/4 wave, to 1/2 wave verticals and with and without radials.

-Eric
W9WLW

-----Original Message----- From: Stuart Rohre
Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 6:05 PM
To: tentec@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TenTec] 160 M antenna

The poster about the antenna said he had 65 radials under it, but did
not say how long they were.

Most 160 fans seem to do better with inverted L or top hat loaded
verticals, for the reasons Rick has mentioned re ground losses and
radiation resistance being low on a short vertical.

One local ham in this area has solved the problem of getting up a long
enough 160m vertical or any tower.  He found on Ebay, a 150 foot reach
bucket truck!  Had to drive it to TX from OK on back roads, as it tops
out at 40 MPH.  But what a nice toy!

-Stuart Rohre
K5KVH
_______________________________________________
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>