Re: [TowerTalk] Dipole Longer or higher?

[Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>]

On Feb 15, 2005, at 1:04 AM, W. E. Bailey wrote:

> I would suggest that you think about shortening the length of your 
> antenna
> (instead of lengthening it).  I know that this sounds 
> counter-intuitive, but
> take a look at L.B. Cebik's article on an 88 foot long doublet
> (http://www.cebik.com/88.html).

Dr. Cebik did his modeling of the 88 foot dipole at 100 feet and 70 
feet horizontal. We're talking about a 40 foot high inverted V. There's 
no reason to emulate Dr. Cebik's design, since at 40 feet and an 
inverted V, the antenna would have none of the benefit.

Making the antenna 88 feet would be a mistake.

Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL        Mail: aa4lr@arrl.net
Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!"
            -- Wilbur Wright, 1901

_______________________________________________

See: http://www.mscomputer.com  for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather Stations", and lot's more.  Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any questions and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.

_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk