I love my trees. They have held up my 160 antennas at my QTH for the last 18 years. For them to make a significant impact on my ability to transmit, they would have to absorb at least 3db (750 watts)
I share your opinions and sentiments, Greg! Over the years I've worked some pretty good stuff around the world on 160 with inverted- Ls held up by trees, running a bit less power than you - abt 500-6
So your loss is less than 3 db, and so it's of no concern to you? I know 160 meter ops who would, and do, pay lots of money for an extra 3 db. Say your tree loss was really 5 db (or even 10) you wou
Just thinking here - I can hold my hand on a 75 watt lightbulb for a few seconds. 10 of those lightbulbs-worth of heat isn't very much heat, dissipated over the surface area of the bark of a tree, 60
Different folks here have promulgated a "high voltage point loss" model for antennas in trees. I think this could be a valid model for a doublet hung with wires directly touching wet tree branches, I
When I was a teenager chasing Gus Browning on 40 meters I caught a tree on fire at night because the end of my dipole was in some dead tree branches! My parents were not happy... 73 Frank W3LPL -- Or
One of the first antennas I hung when I moved here was a horizontal dipole for 80 with loading coils for 160M, built with THHN. One end was touching a branch. When I took it down to re-rig it, I disc
I expect the losses are related to current not voltage. The current of my antenna is in the vertical section for the most part and loss would would have to happen there as coupled to the nearest tree
You're a man after my own heart, Greg! I never worried so much about the "Dbs". As a DXer, I generally listened a lot, and I found that on 160, if I could hear them - more often than not, I could wor
No receive antennas? With 1500 watts into a 100 foot vertical (tower with 7 element 6 meter beam for top loading and nearly 10K feet of wire in radials), and a collection of at best mediocre reversib
I expect the losses are related to current not voltage. The current of my antenna is in the vertical section for the most part and loss would would have to happen there as coupled to the nearest tree
Where are the high voltage points in a "T" antenna? I have the choice of putting up either a new T between two trees, or an L again on 160M. The ends of the T would by necessity be strung over and go
The end of an antenna (for example, at the end insulator of a wire antenna) MUST be a current minimum (near zero) because there is no place for it to go except by capacitance to space or surrounding
Where are the high voltage points in a "T" antenna? The highest voltage is generally at the open end, but how high that voltage is depends on the boundary area between the antenna and whatever is aro
Yes, and that's exactly why those who ask these questions are asking them. I don't think anyone can answer any questions about this with more than a guess. Yep. My suggestions were a "somewhat educat
This is a a very significant statement when you think about it. Ask anyone you talk to on the air how he likes his antenna. Most will say they like it, it's doing great. Ask them how they know. If th
Here is a little data in a sea of complexity: My 160m T is 10' up at the base with 6 x 125' radials elevated ten feet (4 more planned), in a mixed hemlock/red cedar/alder forest/clear area. The top i
Thank you all for the replies regarding the "T" versus "L" rebuild for my 160 antenna. I'm on a 120x120' city lot in Fairbanks. For fun look me up in QRZ, under 'Detail' zoom in for a satellite view
the one that looks the best and takes the most work will make you feel like you have the best signal you ever had, but no one else will notice the change except you unless you tell them about all the
This is a VERY profound piece of advice! The RBN showed me that something was definitely wrong with my TX signal level this summer. It was considerably down from several other stations not that far a