Topband: New TX antenna for 80 and 160?

[Larry]

My first 160 antenna was an 80M dipole that I shorted the feedline and fed 
as T with only a ground rod. It was only about 50 feet high through the 
trees. While it was not a great antenna (my construction was pitiful at the 
time) I was able to work most of the US (only missed Alaska) and some DX 
from NC with it. It was a good for a start on 160. If I had put down radials 
and paid a bit more attention to the construction I am sure it would have 
been a much better antenna.

73, Larry  W6NWS

-----Original Message----- 
From: Tom W8JI
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2012 7:49 AM
To: Rick Kiessig ; topband at contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: New TX antenna for 80 and 160?

> I recently built a dipole for 40/20/15 using 300 ohm twinlead, which 
> worked
> out very well, so I'm thinking of using a similar approach for this 
> antenna,
> using the full length for 160, and trimming one wire to be resonant on 80.
> I'd like to do whatever I can to maximize bandwidth. If I could cover both
> 80 and 75, for example, that would be great.

Why not use a dipole and feed it like a "T" on 160 or maybe 160 and 80??

Are they really going to inspect what is buried or laying on the ground, so
far as a counterpoise??

For what it is worth, a friend of mine lived on a city lot in a densly
populated area with only about ten feet of back yard depth, and about 130
feet of length. He was surrounded by parking lots and buildings. I had about
100 radials with a 1/4 wave tower, and I lived in an area with rich wet
black sandy loam. From that back yard, he was consistantly within a few dB
of my signal.

You never have known his end-fed 80 meter Zepp antenna was there.

Harold did so well from a tiny lot it actually caused him social problems.
Another nasty bitter old cranky man (the type we seem to tolerate up here)
named Joe was so upset Harold was significantly louder then him, that grumpy
old Joe would actually curse poor old Harold. It was always quite a show.

> Questions:
>
> -- Is a low dipole for 80 and 160 on a sloping site like mine worth the
> effort? I'm interested in DX, not NVIS.

Anything works. Anyone can work DX with a low horizontal antenna. It doesn't
exclude DX like a some sort of filter would.

> -- Given my constraints, are there other types of TX antennas I should
> consider?

I'd consider a T antenna out of a dipole, or a bent wire.

> -- What's the best wire to use to minimize stretching and to maximize
> bandwidth and efficiency, and that can handle full legal power?

Any wire can handle full power, but you want **real** copperweld or solid
hard drawn copper. You can hard draw your own solid copper wire.

Watch out for Ham wires that use very thin copper coating or cladding. There
is a lot of that, and the stranded copper clad steel sold for Ham use is
absolute junk. The copper is so thin the RF is down in the steel on low
bands, and the stuff rusts if scratched or rubbed.  A good copperweld has a
pretty thick copper overlay, and that generally means it should be at least
a 16 gauge strand. If you see fine strands or wire the size of a thick
needle, it will behave like steel on low bands and be subject to rust. That
doesn't mean it is useless, just not the best.

I have copperweld here on beverages and other antennas, and I can scratch it
with a knife to clean it and it won't rust. If I even try to solder the Ham
grade junk, it rusts.

Copperweld is (or was) used in long life outdoor support cables like for
bridges, so there may be local suppliers to you.

73 Tom

_______________________________________________
Topband reflector - topband at contesting.com