Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 11:01:09 -0500
From: Courtney Judd <k4wi@k4wi.net>
To: K7LXC@aol.com
Cc: "Towertalk@contesting.com" <Towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] One of our own...
hey Steve, yes, I did enjoy the article about verticals/beach, very
educational! BUT, in the same issue of QST another article "If you can
hang a full-size vertical loop, then hang a dipole" really made me roll
my eyes. While I have never done any modeling, 50 plus years of playing
with various antennas leaves me with the opposite conclusion. A loop is
ALWAYS better than a dipole in my experience. I wanted to spend some
time on 160 some years back so I strung up a dipole at 110 ft with the
resonant point at 1840.00.... worked great.... all kinds of dx.... BUT
the 2:1 swr points were only 7.5 kz up and down... even with a tuner the
antenna preformed poorly beyond that. It was just un-satisfactory so i
pulled it down and replaced it with the 160 antenna I still use today. A
full wave loop fed at a lower corner, top at the same 110 ft point. I
did have to tilt it 15 deg from the vertical to get it in the property
lines but it works like a bandit. It is quiet and broad banded: 2:1 is
1800 to 1890 and works well over the whole frequency! I would NEVER
replace it with a dipole. Well, thats my 2 cents and I am sticking to
it! lol, 73's Cort K4WI
## Instead of feeding in the lower corner, if you really wanted 100% true
vert radiation,
then feed it part way up on one side. I believe it had to be fed 1/3 the way up
one side
of the loop. Then route the coax straight across from the elevated
feedpoint....to the tower,
then down the tower to shack. Feeding the lower corner compromises the loop.
## The feeding 1/3 the way up one side was a result of modeling, done back in
the mid 80s.
Jim VE7RF
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|