Topband: T Top Verticals and yagis

[Ed Sawyer]

There is no question about vertical vs horizontal and also time of NVIS vs low angle prop.  The question started about whether the L was the same as a T.  Its not.  However, ad Mark states, having 2 antennas is the solution, both doing what they are designed to do, well.

 

I do this on 80 as well with a horizontal bi-directional beam designed for low angle radiation to Europe off of a steep ridge.  It works.  Bit to the SW its simply a 3,5 dbd gain at 65ft.  A cloud warmer to a large extent.  I also have vertical slopers to the SW and NW and they kick tail to West Coast and Pacific vs the beam.

 

Years ago, I had a low dipole on 160M.  I am planning to re-install one for the same reasons.  It worked really well around New England.  It came down to put up a second tower many years ago and didn’t go back up.

 

Ed  N1UR

 

From: Mpridesti [mailto:mpridesti at yahoo.com] 
Sent: Monday, March 2, 2020 8:17 AM
To: Richard (Rick) Karlquist
Cc: Don Kirk; Mike Waters; Ed Sawyer; topband
Subject: Re: Topband: T Top Verticals and yagis

 

Interesting topic

 

Rick

 

To your comment regarding close in signals on 160, have some thoughts here:

 

Agree on the 40 and 80 stuff. I use a low inverted Vee for local contacts. Typically I can barely hear the locals on my vertical system (80). Very dramatic difference in signal level. 

 

On 160, I have also have a low inverted Vee (65 ft) and a 4 square of inverted L elements. It is very apparent the inverted L array does carry horizontal (high angle) polarization as it works well with both low and high angle stuff. I still find the close by stations are sometimes better on the inverted Vee (100 miles) but vertical system is not too far behind. 

 

My conclusion is the same effect we see on 80 (vertical vs. horizontal) is nearly the same as 160 except because my vertical system still has some high angle takeoff, the difference is not as pronounced. Certainly confirms the top L portion generates a fair amount of high angle.  It’s the best I can do at this place. 

 

Just one man’s story. 

Regards,

 

Mark, K1RX

603-231-8965





On Mar 2, 2020, at 12:13 AM, Richard (Rick) Karlquist <richard at karlquist.com> wrote:



On 3/1/2020 7:44 PM, Don Kirk wrote:



Hi Rick,

My first example is why NVIS can be useful.  I often can't hear stations 150 miles away on 160 meters using my TX vertical, but they are booming in on my pennant that has a much better response to higher angle signals (I could definitely generate more points in a 160 meter contest if I had the option to switch to an NVIS TX antenna at times). We can deal with fading, phase cancellation at times, etc. in our hobby, but in the AM broadcast industry they want to preserve signal and audio quality as much as possible all of the time so it's really a different situation.

73,

Don (wd8dsb)


OK, Don, that's a fair argument.

I should be able to do some simple tests on the BCB
comparing my car radio with a whip to a pocket radio
with a ferrite rod antenna.  The ferrite rod antenna
is omnidirectional wrt to elevation on account of
symmetry.  At sunset, the SF Bay Area stations reduce
power and become hard to hear 70 miles away here in
Sacramento county on the car radio.  My Sangean radio
should pull these in a lot better.  I will do some A/B'ing.

I completely agree that for 80 and 40 meter contests,
vertical miss out on all the close in stations.  I
have 80 and 40 meter cloud warmers for SS, etc.
I'm just not so sure that this happens on 160 meters.

Rick N6RK

_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector