Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] 43 foot Vertical claim

To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] 43 foot Vertical claim
From: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 09:57:54 -0500
List-post: <towertalk@contesting.com">mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
K8JHR wrote: I DISAGREE with the claim it is a mere cloud warmer on the 
higher bands.   EZNEC studies, performed by others more knowledgeable 
than I,  indicate it has a fairly low take off angle -"....

Well no, it doesn't not have a low take-off angle on the higher bands.  
However takeoff angle isn't the important parameter.  The gain at useful 
elevations is the important parameter.  Here is some typical data for 
the antenna assuming zero coax loss, typical ground, and a typical 
radial system.  The gain at 10 degrees elevation is shown below.

Band ___  Take-off angle ___ Gain at 10 deg
 17  _______  43  __________  -3.2 dBi
 15  _______  37  __________  -5 dBi
 12  _______  32  __________  -5.1 dBi
 10  _______  56  __________  -5.6 dBi
  6  _______  65  __________  -7.6 dBi

For all the bands listed above, most of the signal goes up at an angle 
that never comes back to the earth, however at the lower elevations 
angles which may be useful for communications, there is still enough 
energy to make some contacts even though the antenna would be beaten 
very badly by a low dipole.  You still have to add tuner loss and coax 
loss to this and without a remote tuner, in some cases that may be very 
significant depending on the coax used.

Jerry, K4SAV

Richards wrote:
> NO SINGLE ANTENNA WILL SUIT ALL OPERATORS.
>
> This antenna is the right antenna for the right person
> under the right circumstances.  It is for me, even though
> it may not be for you.
>
> I HAVE ONE OF THESE 43 FOOTERS... AND I AGREE
> WITH MOST OF WHAT HAS BEEN SAID -- But I am
> VERY HAPPY WITH IT.
>
> YOUR assessment will depend on various factors,  including
> 1)  your desire to be the biggest signal on the bands,
> 2)  your economic threshold for pain,
> 3)  your need or desire to have a 60 foot tower,
> 4)  your need or  desire to be a serious contester
> 5)  your available space in the yard, and
> 6)   your XYL's  threshold for aesthetic pain - i.e.,
> her ability to tolerate a tower or other significantly larger antenna
> structure out back -- and other considerations personal to
> each operator.
>
> I DISAGREE with the claim it is a mere cloud warmer on the
> higher bands.   EZNEC studies, performed by others more
> knowledgeable than I,  indicate it has a fairly low take off angle -
> rather good for European DX from my Michigan QTH,  and  it
> works really well on all bands 80 -  20 Meters,   OK on 17 M
> (the jury is out on 10 M as nothing seems to work on that band
> lately...I have yet to even try it on 10 M.)  and it provides a
> just-OK (not great)  antenna for 160 meters - but that is better
> than no antenna on that band.   And that is the point.
>
> HOW MANY REALLY ALL BAND ANTENNAS ARE THERE?
> HOW MANY REQUIRE A TUNER TO WORK ON MULTIPLE
> BANDS?   HOW MANY ARE EFFICIENT ON MORE THAN
> ONE BAND?    Some get acceptable results with a G5RV,
> others with the mystery antenna,  others with an all band
> doublet, other with...  and I with my big stick in the back yard.
>
> Nope... you will NOT be cutting your Hy-Tower down to 43
> feet... but that is OK... there are reasons I selected this over
> the Hy-Tower and I have no regrets.
>
> Nope, it is NOT as good as a beam on a tower.   But not too
> many guys have towers big enough for 80 M beams... or even
> big enough for 40 M beams.    SO IT PROVIDES A LOW BAND
> ANTENNA - WHICH IS A HECK OF A LOT BETTER THAN
> NO LOW BAND ANTENNA -- and does it with low cost, in
> very little real estate.
>
> MY BIG STICK VERTICAL IT IS A GOOD ALL - IN - ONE
> ANTENNA FOR THE RIGHT GUY IN THE RIGHT CIRCUMSTANCES.
> YOU NEED TO DECIDE IF YOU ARE THAT GUY.   If not, then
> purchase another antenna - but there is no reason to bad mouth
> my big stick as your take a pass and opt for another solution.
>
> YES... JIM LUXE SAID IT WELL...  It is "optimized" in ALL the ways
> Jim says.
>
> I BELIEVE THIS IS A COST EFFECTIVE COMPROMISE FOR
> THE GUY WHO NEEDS A COMPROMISE.
>
> IT WILL PROBABLY NOT BEAT A HY-TOWER even on its
> best day - and that was the other antenna I was considering
> last Fall -- but the 43 foot monopole does not require a heavy
> concrete base,   costs about 25% of the cost of a properly done
> Hy-Tower,  and provides a decent  (again not the best)  all-band
> antenna that I can tune anywhere in each band of interest, and
> get a decent signal out - all with small physical foot print and
> low visual impact on the neighborhood.
>
> My big stick has enabled me to put out a signal all over the
> country and work a fair amount of DX.   Guys who hang out at
> the Arizona HRO are so impressed with the signal from my big
> stick vertical,  they have contacted me several times to schedule
> repeat contacts on various Saturday afternoons  when they are
> operating from that location.
>
> So...  If you cannot afford a tower, or do not have the space, or
> cannot hang dipoles high enough, or if you just want a good
> all-band antenna, then it can be a good idea.   It was OPTIMAL
> in MY SITUATION and I have no problem with the advertising
> claims.   It just might not be optimized for YOU.
>
> I acknowledge subjective anecdotal claims about making
> DX contacts is not "proof" one antenna design is better than
> another ...  but I am satisfied I am making DX contacts I could
> not make before, and I am often the bigger signal in many
> rag chew nets and that did not happen before.
>
> SO I AM A REALLY HAPPY WITH MY BIG STICK vertical antenna.
>
> For $500,  I think it is a good deal.    A Hy-Tower might be better,
> I am sure, but that would have cost me $1,500 to$2,000 to do it
> right, and even then it would have a rather narrow bandwidth on
> 80 meters, and virtually no play on 160 M.    (The 160 M  Inverted
> L long wire add-on kit  costs extra and is is no more broad-banded
> than my big stick .)
>
>
> So...   what's not to love about my big stick 43 foot monopole?
>
> YOU may not want one... but I am thrilled with it.   I have a workable
> signal with a very small footprint, and very low visual impact in the
> yard.    No one has complained about it- but I am confident a tower
> would not put me on 80 or 160 meters at all, and might cause a
> range war with the neighbors  (even though there are
> NO RESTRICTIONS in our subdivision.)
>
>
> Just MY take.    Happy trails and good DX to y'all !!
>
>                     =======   K8JHR  ========
>
>
> ==============================================
>
> W5JMW wrote:
>   
>> Thank you Frank,I was getting ready to start cutting down the hightower to 
>> 43 ft....hi hi
>>     
>
>
> ===============================================
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
>
>   

_______________________________________________



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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>