Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] Cost effective Tower height

To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Cost effective Tower height
From: "K1TTT" <K1TTT@ARRL.NET>
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2011 15:56:12 +0000
List-post: <towertalk@contesting.com">mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
Of course he did, but there is no way to fill the nulls with a single beam.
You can mount it on a crankup and search vertically for the best signal, but
that seems to be more expensive to me and not as flexible.  You can cover
lots more elevation angles with a second antenna at about half the height of
the top one... so my recommendation is to keep that in mind because its much
easier to design that in from the start than find out later when you have
more money that the tower you got can't handle it.

David Robbins K1TTT
e-mail: mailto:k1ttt@arrl.net
web: http://wiki.k1ttt.net
AR-Cluster node: 145.69MHz or telnet://k1ttt.net


-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Hunt [mailto:steve@karinya.net] 
Sent: Friday, December 02, 2011 15:18
Cc: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Cost effective Tower height

Of course! But the OP specifically said:

"single multiband beam 40 - 10. No stacks."

Steve G3TXQ


On 02/12/2011 14:59, K1TTT wrote:
> That's what stacks are for!
>
>
_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
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>