Topband: Inverted L improvements - Part 3 (now with data)

[Jeff Blaine]

I worked 160m for a few years when living in a townhome.  The antenna 
was a trap loaded attic mounted dipole that ran through holes in the 
ceiling and down the walls to the ground.  Had a lot of 160m contest fun 
with that.  Worked all the devices in the house as well until I was able 
to get enough pounds of ferrite on everything electronic.

So having some kind of outdoor antenna with some kind of ground by 
comparison, you will do just fine.  Don't worry about how you rack up to 
the ideal.  Just do the best you can and get on the air!

73/jeff/ac0c
alpha-charlie-zero-charlie
www.ac0c.com

On 23-Jan-19 3:21 PM, Jamie WW3S wrote:
> Todd, don’t get discouraged and don’t let lot size fool you....I'm in 
> a subdivision, 80x180 ft lot, with a 50ft tower, hygain hytower for 
> 75/80m (also works as a second radio antenna), and 2L 40m phased 
> array...my inv l is suspended off the top of the tower....I never 
> modeled it, I just know it works.....DXCC on 160 with low 
> power.....now that I added an amp, I'm up to 140+ worked.....the 
> secret on 160 is receiving, which really hampers me.....forgot the 
> modeling for a minute, did you try the reverse beacon thing I 
> mentioned a few days ago.....that will tell you if you are getting out 
> or not.....btw, my L is 135 ft (at least it was when it started, I 
> lost a few feet due to some weather related issues)......about 50 ft 
> vertical, then the rest  mostly horizontal to a tall tree in the 
> woods....
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Todd Goins
> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 4:09 PM
> To: topband at contesting.com ; 
> 676a8e87-aec6-9ead-1297-0bdb1f0a7071 at gmail.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: Inverted L improvements - Part 3 (now with data)
>
> Both Merv and Guy are correct here. Perhaps this antenna doesn't ever
> have a chance at being any good due to the suburban area and lot size
> that I'm constrained by.
>
> Within a 250ft radius (huge!) there is as follows: 80m dipole, 40m
> dipole, 30m dipole, 20m dipole, 15m dipole, 20m yagi, and the original
> 43' tall T antenna for 160m and its radial system. Also, the house is
> easily within 250ft.  Most certainly the radial systems, although not
> physically connected to each other, are let's say "mingling".
>
> So perhaps this tall wire was doomed from the outset? I was so
> encouraged that the 43' T worked so well for what it was and the small
> amount of effort it took to get converted to 160m that maybe a taller
> version would be substantially better. That's how this saga started.
> Maybe the real answer after time/effort/money expended and all of your
> advise is that it isn't going to get any better in my environment?
>
> At this point the best path forward may be to just remove the tall
> wire and reroute all of the new radials (over 2000ft) to the original
> 43' T's radial plate and with any luck make it play better as a
> result?
>
> Todd - NR7RR
>
>
>> Way back some where around the original posting did he not say he had
>> 2 160 antennas up and they are close to each other?  a short vertical 
>> and
>> this antenna?   If so what is the short vertical doing,  is it 
>> floating or
>> grounded or hooked to the ground system yet,  what is its status?
>> Would make all the difference in the world if the short 160 vertical is
>> any where around yet.
>>
>> 73 Merv K9FD
>
>> * Have to pay attention to everything he is reporting. He added a 
>> feedpoint
> *>* choke per K9YC at the same time. Which may, depending on the physical
> *>* connections at his feedpoint, have removed the feedline shield as an
> *>* alternate “radial” in parallel with the increasing but still not 
> full size
> *>* radial system.
> *>>* That indicates that his ground characteristics could be well into 
> the
> *>* “poor” end of the range where ground radial deficiencies are 
> multiplied and
> *>* emphasized.
> *>>* His SWR bandwidth narrowed slightly. Leaving a strong possibility 
> that
> *>* there was an improvement in desired radiated pattern.
> *>>* There remains the question of every conductor in a 250 foot radius,
> *>* including a tower? There remains the question of large dielectric 
> masses
> *>* close by.
> *>>* 73, Guy K2AV
> *
>
> ------------------------------
> _________________
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband 
> Reflector
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.com
> _________________
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband 
> Reflector