For all intents, then, can't we assume that the inverted V has an
omnidirectional pattern?
Also, if you compare an inverted V with a dipole that's less than 1/2
wavelength high, isn't it pretty much a wash? That's what I figured when I
opted to make my 60' high 80M antenna an inverted V instead of a dipole
(easier to raise, easier to match, and no worse than a 60' high dipole on
80M.)
73, Dick, WC1M
-----Original Message-----
From: T A RUSSELL <n4kg@juno.com>
To: lito@rpp.com.pe <lito@rpp.com.pe>; TOWERTALK@contesting.com
<TOWERTALK@contesting.com>
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Friday, April 10, 1998 11:08 PM
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Natual "V" Dipole
>Both a V and inverted V (half wavelength) will have
>LESS GAIN than a FLAT, Horizontal Dipole.
>
>This is because there will be more radiation off the ends
>of the V configurations, taking power AWAY from the
>desired broadside radiation. The smaller the angle
>of the V, the greater the reduction in radiation broadside to
>the V. With a 90 degree angle, the reduction in broadside
>radiation will be close to 3 dB.
>
>The exact feed-point impedance will depend on the
>height of the antenna above ground, but the V antennas
>will have a somewhat lower feed-point impedance
>than a flat dipole.
>
>de Tom N4KG
>
>
>_____________________________________________________________________
>You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
>Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
>Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
>
>
>--
>FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
>Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
>Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
>Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
>Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search
|