Topband: 160 m inverted L

[David Cutter]

Hello Peter

I haven't done any work on this, but Ralph has.  Have a look at this site 
and others of his:
http://www.arising.com.au/people/holland/ralph/shortvert.htm


David
G3UNA



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Peter Voelpel" <dj7ww at t-online.de>
To: <topband at contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2016 4:57 PM
Subject: Re: Topband: 160 m inverted L


> Think of a dipole close to the ground, it will not be efficient with all
> that coupling to earth and resulting losses.
>
> 73
> Peter
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of David
> Cutter
> Sent: Mittwoch, 9. November 2016 17:37
> To: Mike Waters; Rob Atkinson; topband
> Subject: Re: Topband: 160 m inverted L
>
>
> I recall reading from Ralph Holland that 0.015 wavelength was a good 
> height.
>
> David
> G3UNA
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Mike Waters" <mikewate at gmail.com>
> To: "Rob Atkinson" <ranchorobbo at gmail.com>; "topband"
> <topband at contesting.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2016 4:11 PM
> Subject: Re: Topband: 160 m inverted L
>
>
>> Fifty feet?! That means the feedpoint --the bottom of the antenna-- would
>> be 50 feet up! Do you know how high the top would have to be? I don't
>> agree
>> with that at all. And I've never heard of anyone who ever did that.
>>
>> The four elevated radials in these tests were just 16 feet high! And what
>> is more, the frequencies were 1490, 1450, 1240, and (maybe) 625 KHz.
>> Almost
>> as effective as 120 buried radials.
>> lists.contesting.com/_topband/2007-11/msg00248.html
>>
>> I forget the radial height in Rudy Severns' (N6LF) tests, but IIRC they
>> weren't anywhere near 50' high.
>>
>> My two elevated radials were 10' high. I know that a little higher (and a
>> few more of them) would have been better, but I can tell you that that
>> 160m
>> inverted-L WORKED! And I'm by no means the only one. :-)
>>
>> 73, Mike
>> www.w0btu.com
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 6:10 AM, Rob Atkinson <ranchorobbo at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The rule of thumb for effective elevated radial height is 1/10
>>> wavelength,
>>> so on 160, around 50 feet up.
>>>
>>> 73
>>>
>>> Rob
>>> K5UJ
>>>
>> _________________
>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband