Topband
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Topband: DX on 160, was: Topband QRP WAS

To: "Mark Lunday" <mlunday@nc.rr.com>, <topband@contesting.com>, "K4OWR" <k2owr@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Topband: DX on 160, was: Topband QRP WAS
From: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Reply-to: Tom W8JI <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2015 21:22:54 -0500
List-post: <topband@contesting.com">mailto:topband@contesting.com>
On 12/5/2015 5:43 PM, Mark Lunday wrote:
Bill, a question about your 160 meter antenna. I have learned from the wise old-timers on this message board that a vertical antenna with broad-banded
behavior is a lossy antenna.  Same with a vertical antenna that shows 1:1
match.

Some people might believe that myth, but it isn't true.

Bandwidth is a meaningless determinant of efficiency. SWR is meaningless also, by itself, in indicating efficiency.

Verticals with good efficiency have sufficient ground radials/counterpoise
and present approx 30 ohms impedance and therefore do not provide a 1:1
match (I think it's about 1.5:1 or something like that). In addition, the efficient verticals are not broad-banded. Dipoles yes, verticals no. Also,
if your antenna is not a vertical on 160, then as you know it will be an
even bigger challenge to work DX on TopBand.

A 1/4 wave tall tower with a perfect ground system will cover all of the band with reasonable SWR change. If series fed they will be around 30 ohms depending in many things, but that still does not tell us efficiency.

efficient verticals are not broad-banded. Dipoles yes, verticals no. Also,
if your antenna is not a vertical on 160, then as you know it will be an
even bigger challenge to work DX on TopBand.

Actually that is exactly backwards, Mark.

Dipoles are narrower than 1/4 wave verticals, all things equal. This is because a 1/4 wave vertical has half the resonant length.

73 Tom
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

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