Topband: Inverted L height vs. length.

[W0MU Mike Fatchett]

I have used one inverted L and the horses wiped it out a few years ago.  
I had about 70 ft of vertical and the rest horizontal.

I am not sure how much interaction the tree will have if you run the 
wire next to it.  The end sloping down will affect the match if my 
memory serves.

If that is what you can do, what other choices are there?

I would say that top loaded vertical might be a better option as they 
both require radials right?

Mike W0MU

On 3/1/2015 12:19 PM, Mike & Coreen Smith VE9AA wrote:
> 24 hours and even not one comment?
>
>   
>
> What if I had a  BOG for RX, buried, uninsulated radials and had worked K1N
> with it during my move into a Brave New World?
>
> Maybe I really should've said I was renting the station out for hire to
> offshore stns only, to be used to work rare countries, during contests for
> DXCC credits to put them at the top of the honor roll...
>
>   
>
> ;-)
>
>   
>
> Sorry for asking a pretty reasonable non-emotionally charged question (how
> foolish of me)
>
>   
>
> Mike, An Inverted L challenged guy in the snowbelt of NB
>
>   
>
> VE9AA
>
>   
>
> Mike, Coreen & Corey
>
> Keswick Ridge, NB
>
>   
>
> From: Mike & Coreen Smith VE9AA [mailto:ve9aa at nbnet.nb.ca]
> Sent: February 28, 2015 2:40 PM
> To: 'topband at contesting.com'
> Subject: Inverted L height vs. length.
>
>   
>
> de VE9AA
>
>   
>
> I know inverted L's have been hashed out quite a few times on this list, and
> I have gleaned some knowledge.  At my previous QTH I had a 5/16th WL one
> which seemed to work tons better than my current one, even though I was not
> up over 40' high.
>
>   
>
> As it happens, on my current property I don't have any towers, nor tall
> trees so I have a general question.
>
>   
>
> As far as a 127' inverted L goes, do I have anything to gain by sloping the
> "vertical" portion of the wire slightly up to a short treetop, vs. going
> nearly vertical, then the rest horizontal?
>
>   
>
> Example:
>
> I have a 35-40' tree nearish to where my coax exits the ground from an
> underground run.  I slope it "up" so essentially I have likely close to 50'
> of "vertical" then the remainder meanders through some shorter treetops and
> comes back to ground rather quickly (unfortunately it's more an inverted U
> than L).  I have a few thousand feet of radials mostly in the southern
> portion of the field under  the "horizontal section". A 800pf Cap is at the
> base and my SWR is around 50-60Kcs at the 2.1:1 pts.  I seem to do quite
> well into w1,2,3,4,8 and at times western EU/Carib.  Anything outside that
> sucks.  That tells me I probably have gobs of high angle radiation.
>
>   
>
> Have I anything to gain by putting the coax directly under the tree, going
> perfectly vertical for 37-ish feet, then, sadly, pretty much "down to the
> ground" for the "horizontal" section same as the original?
>
>   
>
> (hope this ascii art works)
>
>   
>
> Ie:  This is what I am doing now (wire is around 65*-70* vertical or so_)
>
>     ___
>
>   /        \
>
> /            \
>
> /               \
>
>   
>
>   
>
> but I wonder of this is any better
>
>   
>
> __ _
>
> |        \
>
> |          \
>
> |            \
>
>   
>
>   
>
>   
>
> Lastly, I could go farther away from the tree and try to get 80-90' of
> sloping wire (likely closer to 45*) and then have the remainder droop itself
> back to Earth.
>
>   
>
>     _  _ _ _
>
>             /             \
>
>          /                 \
>
>      /                      \
>
> /
>
>   
>
> Anyone have a skyhook for sale?
>
>   
>
>   
>
> Thanks for any insight.
>
>   
>
> Mike VE9AA FN66na @ 660' ASL.rocky ridgetop.
>
>   
>
> Mike, Coreen & Corey
>
> Keswick Ridge, NB
>
>   
>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband