Try an AI1H broadband dipole. This has worked well for me on 80 meters. I
operate mostly CW but it covers most of the phone bands also.
It's shown here on page 9.
http://vss.pl/lf/08.pdf
It's discussed in this newsletter.
http://www.madriverradioclub.org/newsletters/Vol_38/Flash3801.pdf
It is also in the antenna handbook.
I haven't ported it over to 160M to see what the bandwidth would yield on that
band but it does well on 80M. I need to rapidly QSY and don't really want to
be tweaking a tuner every time so this has worked well for me. If you build it
for 160M let us know what kind of bandwidth it yields.
Earl
N8SS
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 00:47:18 -0400
From: K8RI <K8RI-on-TowerTalk@tm.net>
To: "towertalk@contesting.com" <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: [TowerTalk] remote tuner Vs lumped constants
Message-ID: <51EF5C56.6080708@tm.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
I have several 160 and 75 meter antennas. I'd like to be able to cover
most og these bands with the least involvement from the shack after the
initial set-up.
I run QRO, so matching low impedance antennas like a half sloper can be
problematic. Yet I'd like to lower the SWR at the feed point so a solid
state amp would be happy and have the ability to switch to the band or
rapidly QSY.
Most of the remote tuners I've looked at come up a bit shu with QRO let
alonr with a high SWR when covering a large portion of the band.
74 is a center fed, half wave, sloping fan dipole
I have the option of an auto tuner, or switched capacitance at the feed
point.
I'd prefer the auto tuner approach, but is there such an animal that
will cover 160 reliably on QRO?
73
Roger (K8RI)
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|