Speaking of low wire antennas, what was used on Peter I for 160?
73, Keith NM5G
-----Original Message-----
From: towertalk-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:towertalk-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of bob finger
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 1:49 PM
To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Was Radials... 160m High angle vs. low angle
I cannot speak for the entire world, but here on the right coast of the usa
sometimes 160 signals do come in quite high at sunrise or sunset.
Not every day but it does happen. Once in a while even on long haul dx the
inverted vee at 60 feet will beat the vertical...I have never seen it other
than during the grey line, but that does not mean it does not happen. I'd
say vertical is better 95% of the time and the vee only about 5% of the
time.
My best memory example is T32 a couple of years ago at my sunrise. He was
S9 on the inverted vee for about 15 minutes. I worked him easily on the
vee, switched to my club call and could not raise a peep out of him on the
vertical. You can indeed work dx on 160 with a low dipole. You will need
lots and lots of persistence tho. Kind of like doing qrpp on 20 with a
normal antenna farm. 73 bob de w9ge
Jim Jarvis wrote:
>Having a 160m inverted vee with the apex at 60' is like having a 10m
>inverted vee with the apex at 4'. It's a cloud burner.
>A 160m dipole at 100' is a LOW antenna.
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|