Low antennas are less than ideal, but will still work. I have a 40 meter
DXCC hanging on the way which was earned running 100 watts to pretty poor
antennas-mainly a long wire at about 25 feet high or a dipole with a max
height of 30 feet at the apex. Most small lots will still handle a
vertical, even if you can't get alot of radials down. A vertical with
nothing but a ground rod is better than QRT.
73s John NE0P
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lee Buller" <k0wa@swbell.net>
To: "Charles Gallo" <Charlie@TheGallos.com>; "CQcontest Reflector"
<cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 2:36 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] NAQP Lessons learned
> Charles,
>
> Good observations. I think that you have some good thoughts there.
About the antennas...
>
> I contest with low antennas a lot. Why? Because on a city lot, you
can't get antennas as high as you would like. But, you can still do a lot
of damage in a contest with low antennas. I do quite well on 40 and 80 with
antennas that are less than 45 feet at the apex...and about 10 feet on the
legs. In a domestic contest like NAQP, low antennas with high angle of
radiation is kinda what you want. But again, low antennas will surprise you
when you start working Cuba and PR on 40 meters. We also did well on 160
with a dipole that you could say is low. So, don't discount those low wire
antennas. There is a place for them in contesting.
>
> Lee - k0WA
>
>
>
> In our day and age it seems that Common Sense is in short supply. If you
don't have any Common Sense - get some and use it. If you can't find any
common sense, ask for help from somebody who has some common sense.
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|