Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] Dipole Longer or higher?

To: "W. E. Bailey" <ebailey@earthlink.net>,"'Derek Cohn/WB0TUA'" <vibroplex@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Dipole Longer or higher?
From: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@contesting.com>
Reply-to: Tom Rauch <w8ji@contesting.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 06:06:53 -0500
List-post: <mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
I would suggest that you think about shortening the length
of your antenna
(instead of lengthening it).  I know that this sounds
counter-intuitive, but
take a look at L.B. Cebik's article on an 88 foot long
doublet
(http://www.cebik.com/88.html).>>

You are right. It is counter-intuitive and for a good
reason.

Cebik ignored matching and feeline loss in that analysis and
ONLY looked at pattern. That is NOT the way to consider a
system.

See:
http://www.w8ji.com/short_dipoles_and_problems.htm

People whine and moan about G5RV's (often incorrectly). Why
would anyone think a dipole shorter than a G5RV would
suddenly work better?

You are better off to make the dipole at least 100 to 150
feet long, and just leave it at that. Also pick a good
feeline length. Avoid an exact multiple of 1/4 wl on the
lowest band. In other words avoid a 60 ft or 120 ft long
feedline. Shoot for 42 feet or 85 feet in feedline length to
avoid off the map impedances.

73 Tom






_______________________________________________

See: http://www.mscomputer.com  for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather 
Stations", and lot's more.  Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any questions 
and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.

_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

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