[Top] [All Lists]

[TowerTalk] Are higher HF antenna's really better?

To: <>
Subject: [TowerTalk] Are higher HF antenna's really better?
From: (Earl Dery)
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 16:56:20 -0800
One can also look in the Archives. I believe there have been posts from 
people telling of their observations at larger stations of what they were 
hearing at particular times, and which antenna setup seemed to be the best 
performer. The one that sticks in my mine(although the details don't right 
now) were observations posted by George K5TR, who has had the opportunity 
to have operated in some of the larger 5 Area Stations.

I personally believe that No Two Locations are the same, what will work at 
one place will not necessarily work at another. I usually try encourage 
someone who is putting up their first Tower/Antenna to try to get to 70 
feet if possible, reason: about 1 wavelength on 20, 1.5 on 15 and 2 
wavelengths on 10(which at times maybe to high as mentioned by others).

I know for myself here with a single 20 at 132 feet that I am sure at times 
that I am not hearing some of the callers. This year I hope to finally fix 
that by adding in a 20 at about the 60 foot level, for me the opposite on 
15 and 10 these antennas are at 45 and 35 feet, I am convinced that 
certainly towards Europe I would benefit from additional height.

I always enjoy these types of questions and the following discussions, they 
help to give insight why one may try one thing as opposed to another.

  I hope others will post their observations when having a choice of 
antennas at different heights.

73 Earl VE7IN

This list is sponsored by the new Store.  When you buy products
like ICE filters, Array Solutions StackMatch, or M-Squared Antennas from
the eHam Store for the same price you pay direct, a portion of the sale
price goes to support this list.  Check it out at

FAQ on WWW:     
Administrative requests:

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