Topband: low inv-vee

[Wes Stewart]

Could be. An effective balun on 160 isn't trivial, but then the questions are at 
least twofold. 1) How ineffective is it and what are the relative currents on 
the intended radiator compared to the incidental radiator and 2)  what 
constitutes the ground plane?  On my cactus patch I'm working my tail off to get 
an effective ground plane laid down under my "real" inverted L.  I would be 
saddened to know that 120 feet of Heliax laying on the ground from the antenna 
to the shack would be all I need. :-)

Wes  N7WS

On 3/28/2018 6:24 PM, Richard (Rick) Karlquist wrote:
> One thing about an inverted vee on 160 that can
> confusing:  if you don't go to a lot of trouble to
> have a really effective balun, you end up having
> feedline radiation.  In the case, you really have
> an inverted L.  This is related to articles written
> about so called "loop skywires" where they say:
> do NOT use a balun.  That's because they are really
> counting on the feedline to be the vertical radiator
> on 160 meters and the loop is just top loading.
>
> Therefore, low inverted vee "success stories" may
> not mean what you think they mean.
>
> Rick N6RK
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>