Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] 3-Stack Tribander Issues

To: Towertalk <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] 3-Stack Tribander Issues
From: Jim CASSIDY <jc_ki7y@q.com>
Reply-to: "Tower and HF antenna construction topics." <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 15:03:03 +0000
List-post: <towertalk@contesting.com">mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
Hi Bill, The only thing I have heard about stacking tribanders was at W7GG. The 
had a 3 stack of KT34s and found that a 2 stack would work better for most 
bands.  I don't know any of the details, only that he did change to the 2 
stack.  That was on a 195 ft tower.
73

Jim Cassidy

KI7Y




> Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 22:30:46 -0800
> From: wycpublic@gmail.com
> To: towertalk@contesting.com
> Subject: [TowerTalk] 3-Stack Tribander Issues
> 
> I’m thinking of building a 3-stack of tribanders.  Folks who are familiar
> with stacked monobanders give me doubtful looks.  I’m wondering who on the
> list has actual experience stacking tribanders, and what practical
> observations they can offer.
> 
> 
> 
> By way of background, I was an EE in a past life, with a bit of professional
> experience with phased arrays for VHF/UHF and shortwave broadcast, and
> radar.  So I appreciate the phased array concept.
> 
> 
> 
> My contemplated stack has 8.6m spacing between antennas (with the top
> antenna at 130’).  I recognize that half wave spacing has certain desirable
> attributes, and that my spacing is a bit large for 15m and a bit short for
> 20m.  But modeling suggests that’s not a big deal.  (I may cover 10m
> separately.)
> 
> 
> 
> I expect to turn the top two antennas in tandem, and have the bottom antenna
> independently rotatable.
> 
> 
> 
> I recognize that tribanders are, themselves, compromises.  However, current
> designs seem a vast improvement over the designs of 30 years ago.  (I’m
> thinking of using one of the interlaced models, e.g., with 2 or 3 full sized
> elements per band.)
> 
> 
> 
> I’m not interested in longer boom yagis – narrow in azimuth and broad in
> elevation pattern (e.g., beaming Europe only to put a null on Africa, or
> beaming Japan only to put a null on NZ/Australia).  I’d rather have a
> broader azimuthal pattern, and a selection of different elevation patterns –
> depending on whether I drive antennas #1+#2+#3, or #1+#2, or # 2+#3, or
> #1+#3, or #1, or # 2 or# 3.
> 
> 
> 
> What issues/observations can folks with experience relate?
> 
> 
> 
> Tnx/73,
> 
> 
> 
> Bill, K2PO/7
> _______________________________________________
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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

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