[Top] [All Lists]

[TowerTalk] Re; 160m radials

To: <>
Subject: [TowerTalk] Re; 160m radials
From: Jim Jarvis <>
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 15:33:30 -0400
List-post: <>
Dear TT:

I've restrained myself, and have heard good advice on the two topics
concerning short raidals and "elevated" radials.

Restraint fails me.  But I'll be brief.

Re: short radials...put out as many as you 'em into the water.
Make 'em resonant, if you can.  Don't worry about symmetry.  Just do it.

re: 'elevated' radials.  Standing on it, we can SEE where earth is, at
300THZ.  We have no idea where it 'is' at 1.8MHz.  Effectively, it's
someplace down there....(if you want to be scientific, contemplate the index
of refraction, the pseudo -brewster angle, and other modelled phenomena.)
Are on-ground radials really elevated?

Here's a practical solution to the 160m GP/inv. Ell. Issue:

Make it 133' on the hoist, and make 4 radials of 133'.  Shoot it over the
biggest tree you have, and pull it up and over and out, however you can.
Raise radials as much as you can.  Then, fold them back to produce
resonance.  Just get 'em high enough so nobody gets hurt from hitting a
voltage node.

I put one up for 160, in VT, and first QSO was Campbell island.  Terrain is
the big variable.  Ignore the rules, be pragmatic.  An antenna in the air
will outperform a great model, every time.   Worst case, you scrap 30 bucks
worth of wire.



TowerTalk mailing list

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