On Wed, 2 Oct 1996, Harold Smith wrote:
> I see a lot of discussion about an inverted V on 160.
>
> Think about this. If you had a dipole on 160 at 50ft ( an inverted V would
> be impossible at that height ), It would perform about the same as a dipole
> on 20 meters at 6.25 ft. There would be no vertical radiation to speak of.
> To make it a true inverted V on 160 it would have to be at least 265 ft up !!
>
So I should scratch all the European QSO's I logged last winter using my
inverted vee at 45 feet? Of course I do have the "east coast
advantage".... I'm not arguing that there is much room for improvement,
but given the height of my tower and geometry of my property, this is
about the best I could come up with easily...
73,
Bob Patten, N4BP
n4bp@shadow.net
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/topband.html
Submissions: topband@contesting.com
Administrative requests: topband-REQUEST@contesting.com
Sponsored by Akorn Access, Inc & KM9P
|