Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] 160m antenna ideas / suggestions

To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] 160m antenna ideas / suggestions
From: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 13:44:24 -0700
List-post: <mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
(Sigh)  Note to self;  Avoid calling pompous asses on medium wave bands while using an "inferior" antenna. Somehow, based on received signal levels, they know what kind of antenna is being used at the other end and will belittle you for making them struggle.

 On 1/25/2018 10:23 AM, Rob Atkinson wrote:
Jim Brown is correct.  160 m. is a medium wave band.   HF antenna
wisdom does not apply.  Of course those in denial will probably never
learn; the band is loaded with piss weakers who answer my CQs with
crappy antennas like inverted Vs, and wavelength low cloud burner
loops and dipoles which may work reasonably well on HF but are
relatively poor performers on 160.

Obviously brief assessments are general in nature--there are times of
the day and distances for which an antenna that is generally inferior,
will work well, but year in and year out, over varied conditions,
times and distances, the vertical series fed radiator over an
extensive ground system has been shown to be superior for
transmitting.

73

Rob
K5UJ

_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>