Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

## Re: [TowerTalk] optimum vertical length

 To: "'jimlux'" , Re: [TowerTalk] optimum vertical length "Joe Subich, W4TV" lists@subich.com Mon, 1 Jun 2009 09:59:21 -0400 mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
 ``` > So, then, what about this trade-space (again, in the world of fairly > inconspicuous antennas).. > > You could have a ground mounted vertical (of whatever length) > > OR > > a shorter vertical sticking up from the roofline, with a bunch of wire > as a counterpoise/ground screen on the roof. (or a vertical dipole) In my opinion, the "optimum" solution consists of two antennas. The first would be a roof mounted 22 foot vertical (either a "half size" 43' vertical with tuner or an R5/AV-620) for 20-10 meters and a ground mounted 88' vertical (or inverted L - up 55 out 32) for 160-30 meters. In this case "optimum" is defined as a minimum effort/impact solution that provides reasonable performance on all bands. 73, ... Joe, W4TV > -----Original Message----- > From: towertalk-bounces@contesting.com > [mailto:towertalk-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of jimlux > Sent: Monday, June 01, 2009 9:27 AM > To: jim Jarvis > Cc: towertalk@contesting.com > Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] optimum vertical length > > > jim Jarvis wrote: > > Jim, > ". > > > > Regardless of the electrical length of the antenna, though, getting > > it up high and in the clear > > is the important factor. A 40m vertical dipole plays > amazingly well > > on multiple bands, with > > a tuner, if you can get the high current portion of the antenna up > > 50' or so, in a tree. > > > > > > So, then, what about this trade-space (again, in the world of fairly > inconspicuous antennas).. > > You could have a ground mounted vertical (of whatever length) > > OR > > a shorter vertical sticking up from the roofline, with a > bunch of wire > as a counterpoise/ground screen on the roof. (or a vertical dipole) > > If one uses the old CB antenna rules of 12-15 ft max height above > structure as a constraint, are you better off with some sort of short > vertical dipole, up 30 ft on the roof, or with a 45 ft > vertical, on the > ground? > > > Assuming you're not at the beach, etc. It seems that getting the > feedpoint up in the air will reduce near field losses from > the soil, at > the expense of incurring losses in your groundplane/lower half of the > 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 ```
 Current Thread Re: [TowerTalk] optimum vertical length, jim Jarvis Re: [TowerTalk] optimum vertical length, Joe Subich, W4TV Re: [TowerTalk] optimum vertical length, Paul Christensen Re: [TowerTalk] optimum vertical length, jimlux Re: [TowerTalk] optimum vertical length, Joe Subich, W4TV <= Re: [TowerTalk] optimum vertical length, Dan Zimmerman N3OX Re: [TowerTalk] optimum vertical length, jimlux [TowerTalk] tramming preparation, Sain'T Tom Re: [TowerTalk] optimum vertical length, Michael Ryan Re: [TowerTalk] optimum vertical length, jimlux Re: [TowerTalk] optimum vertical length, jimlux Re: [TowerTalk] optimum vertical length, Joe Subich, W4TV Re: [TowerTalk] optimum vertical length, jimlux