[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] TowerTalk Digest, Vol 84, Issue 5

Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] TowerTalk Digest, Vol 84, Issue 5
From: Art <>
Date: Sat, 05 Dec 2009 08:17:32 -0700
List-post: <">>
Blair, depends on what you'd like to do with it. A horizontal 160 ant that low 
will warm the clouds with its very high radiation angle. Any component you can 
get vertical will probably be a huge benefit if you want good success across 
the pond. If local short range is your goal might not make all that much 

73 Art

Blair wrote:

Message: 6
Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2009 08:10:41 -0500
From: Blair S Balden <>
Subject: [TowerTalk] dipole configuration
Message-ID: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Hello towertalk group,

I'm getting set to put up a wire dipole for 160 meters.  I'm considering 2 
options, and I wanted to hear which one you guys think might be better.  The 
feed point will be about 38 feet up on the side of a tower near the house.  
From there, I have just enough room to stretch out a full quarter wave to the 
back edge of my property, where I can get about 25 - 30 feet of height in a 
tree at the other end.  So this leg of the dipole will be pretty much 

For the other leg, I don't have that much room.  I will need to put in a 
loading coil.  I have about 60 feet to a tree in the front yard, where I can 
get about 25 feet of height.  This is what I was planning, but I also thought 
about bringing that leg straight down from the feed point.  In that case, the 
antenna would have one full-length horizontal leg and one short (about 30 foot) 
vertical leg with a loading coil.
Do you think anything would be gained by having part of the antenna vertical?  
Would I get some lower-angle radiation if I did it that way?  Or would it work 
better more or less horizontal?

Thanks in advance for any input.

Blair NP2F     


TowerTalk mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: [TowerTalk] TowerTalk Digest, Vol 84, Issue 5, Art <=