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

[K9FD]

Dont get discouraged by all this for sure

What I see as fly in the ointment is another 160 antenna close by with 
another
radial system,
Anyone of you gurus ever figure what putting power into a 160 antenna does
with another one within feet of it?   Imagine power going out, and right 
back
into the other one,  being burned up in loss..
Its like having a parasitic element sitting there and screwing up your 
entire
attempts.
Wonder why the SWR is broad,  your tuning two antennas,  any one who has
ever tried to tune a 4 square with all elements up knows it cannot be done
actually.

Take down the short 160 antenna or find a way to detune it far far from 
160,
and then take some measurements.

Come on expurts look at the whole picture not be tunnel visioned,

73 Merv K9FD
> 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