I had also thought about an inverted L. It would be fairly easy to do, if I
had two towers. I hadn't done it prior to this because there is no way to
put radials anywhere near the base of my current tower. I also was a little
worried about having an RF "hot" antenna in reach of my grandkids. I figure
that problem is passing us by and the kids have not shown any interest in
the tower or antennas.
Do you think the inverted L would be better than shunt feeding the 100'
tower with equal radials? I certainly won't be taking down my 160M inverted
V. It is a much better rcvg antenna than my 80 M sloper on 80 and the tower
will replace the K9AY array's location so I will be out of that antenna
>From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:towertalk-
>email@example.com] On Behalf Of Gene Smar
>Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 9:27 AM
>To: Bill Parry; TOWERTALK@contesting.com
>Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Its summer and antennas are on my mind
>From: Bill Parry <BPARRY@RGV.RR.COM>
>Date: 2007/06/30 Sat AM 08:28:11 CDT
>Subject: [TowerTalk] Its summer and antennas are on my mind
>I was wondering if maybe gamma matching the tower with multiple radials
>would provide a significant improvement on 160M?
>The saying is very true on Topband: You can never have enough antennas. I
>would certainly advise you to construct a shunt feed for your new tower on
>160M and keep it in your quivver along with the inv V.
> When I had my inv L and my new shunt-fed Trylon operating as A/B on
>160M, I saw a 5-10 dB (S-meter measurement) difference on RX between the
>two favoring the shunt feed. Folks also told me that there was a similar
>5-10 dB improvement when I went to the shunt feed.
>Gene Smar AD3F
>TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk mailing list