Topband: Double L antenna as an alternative for the radial-challenged?

[Charlie Cunningham]

Hi, Andreas

Well, it's interesting. I could try modeling it in EZNEC, Have you tried
that? 

I wonder a bit about how good the cancellation is between the horizontal
wires, when the lower one is only 10' off the ground, but a model might
provide some insight! (I'd wonder a bit too about the proximity of the
vertical portion to the tower!)

Good luck with it!

73,
Charlie, K4OTV

-----Original Message-----
From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Andreas
Hofmann
Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 2:24 PM
To: 'topband at contesting.com'
Subject: Topband: Double L antenna as an alternative for the
radial-challenged?

Hi,

I am looking into what it would take to put a decent 160m antenna up.  I got
many large trees, but also rather thick woods, and the radials are always
something that I do not enjoy much. Also, I cannot see myself to do 16
radials. 4 elevated radials may be tough as well.  Terrain is just not as
easy to get around.

Now, I am looking at options that do not require radials and still have a
decent radiation angle for DX.  I am looking at this antenna
http://www.yccc.org/Articles/double_l.htm, the double L antenna.  Has anyone
experience with it?  What is the pattern of it and can it be compared to a
quarter wave vertical?  I would assume since it somehow resembles a vertical
dipole and therefore does not require any radials, that its efficiency
should be much better than a quarter wave vertical with less than adequate
number of radials...  Are my assumptions correct, and are there any other
gotchas?

Thanks and cu soon on topband
Andy,
KU7T
_________________
Topband Reflector