Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2017 17:26:31 -0700
From: Wes Stewart <wes_n7ws@triconet.org>
To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Fan Dipole
<It's a hobby . We get to choose our own metrics.
<I do find it interesting that my metric of DXCC countries worked is bogus in
your mind while equally subjective experiences of yours are more valuable.? Did
you compare your antennas on a calibrated range operated by skilled people?
It's a rhetorical question; no need to answer.
On 10/1/2017 6:15 AM, john@kk9a.com wrote:
> I am surprised that people still do not realize that working DXCC countries
> is no indication of antenna performance. The poor desert ground may be
> helping your inverted V however why would an inverted V be your only option?
> I have used various 160m antennas from a number of locations in the US and
> Caribbean and found a low inverted V to be very inferior to a top loaded
> short vertical even without an extensive radial field.
>
> John KK9A
>
### DXCC vs ant performance ? Thats like comparing a tribander vs a 20m
monobander..
on 20m. You will works loads of dx with a tribander..or any yagi for that
matter.... on
40-30-20-17-15-12-10m. So John is correct in stating DXCC totals is no
indication of ant performance.
## However on 160m, dxcc totals probably is a good indicator of ant
performance..at least using normal modes like
cw or ssb.
## City lots, RX noise, counterpoise, and 160m dont belong in the same
sentence. TX is not the issue, its RX.
I cant figure out how to possibly get enough separation between a TX..and a RX
ant. Next problem is.... surrounded
by noise on 160m. Orient the dedicated 160M RX ant to say ZL land.... and
its also pointed at a noise source.
Now what do I do ? I see no solution.... except for maybe using a remote
RX....or perhaps using some esoteric mode.
Jim VE7RF
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|