I have a vertical in my backyard that I currently feed at the base with an SG-239 200 watt tuner. I want to increase my power from 100 watts to 400 watts. In order to accomplish this I either need a
Here is an article that should answer your question: http://www.vk1od.net/multibandunloadedvertical/index.htm Also notice the paragraphs about the balun used in some of these antennas. Here is a link
The coax loss and antenna impedance are both frequency dependant. Your question is impossible to answer without knowing what bands you intend to use with this antenna. John KK9A I have a vertical in
Worst case impedance looks to be on 12m where the losses in 125ft of RG213 would be 6.3dB Steve G3TXQ _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ T
Should have said that the matched loss, using the tuner at the feedpoint, would have been 1.2dB. So, tuner in the shack is worse by about 5dB Steve G3TXQ _____________________________________________
A couple of other options: Fixed tuned matching networks: http://www.n3ox.net/projects/lowbandvert or motorize your tuner http://www.n3ox.net/projects/servo There are more elegant ways to do that, st
A remote antenna switch, used to switch among networks or taps in a network might be a handy thing with this approach. One potential bummer is that some autotuners aren't happy about passing control
It would appear that the SWR curve that is still on the Array Solutions web site was measured with a misapplied 4:1 voltage balun (which puts half of the antenna RF voltage on the outside of the coax
Terry: I think you have your numbers correct. I measure about 17-jX ohms for my 60 foot, top loaded vertical on 160. My ground system has about 40 radials but they are shorter than 1/2 wavelength on
Feedline radiation is the same way that the TAC antenna gets an SWR of 1.0 on 40 meters from an antenna that has a feedpoint impedance close to 5 ohms. It appears your Zero Five conclusions are corre
The flap over the correct balun / unun / transformer sure soured my impression of Array Solutions and Zero-Five. Their handling of this situation reminds me of the way Intel handled the situation wit
You know something? There's no good purely technical/performance reason for everyone to want one of these antennas. The basic theory, if you can call it that, is that you can build a mediocre but sim
My only "defense" (not that one is necessary) is that the big vertical IS all you say it is. Nevertheless, it has proven to be a fairly good performer, providing better results than my former dipoles
I think that is many peoples' experience. And in the end, ham radio without making contacts is just electrical engineering. But I think a lot of people (and I'm not saying you do) follow this line o
What's ERP have to do with the legal limit? 73 Roger (K8RI) _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing list TowerTalk@contestin
Nothing... I probably should have said 1500W ERP instead of full legal limit ERP, because of course, there's no such thing as the latter. I'm just saying that I think people expect they need to *RADI
I'll throw in my 2-cents worth. I replaced my Butternut HF-6 with a 43-foot vertical after doing a bunch of A/B testing between the two antennas. The evaluation was all done on receive and on 160-15
Great news -- Phil. I like my 43 footer, also. I am pleased to hear you liked it tuner at the base of the antenna, and to learn about its limitations at 160 m. It is very helpful to learn of your exp