[TowerTalk] Quest for better

[Guy Olinger, K2AV]

Try feeding that 160 meter inverted el at the end (hi-Z) against ground
on eighty meters. Avoids a lot of the 1/4 wave conundrums and has a
pattern much like a hemisphere.  I used up 63 feet and out 70 feet with
good luck on 80 meters. Since you have to use a tuner/matching
arrangement of some kind any way, it covers the entire 80/75 band. The
high current is up there around the bend.

Put it on a model and see how it compares to a 60' inverted vee at a
takeoff of 5 & 10 degrees.

Sounds like you have both of them up there. You could do some a/b
comparisons on 80 meter DX.

73
-----------------

Guy Olinger
Apex, NC, USA

----- Original Message -----
From: "alsopb" <alsopb@gloryroad.net>
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, June 08, 2001 7:12 AM
Subject: [TowerTalk] Quest for better


> For years I have settled for an 80M dipole 60' up.
>
> My particular interest is to target EU.  According to YT arrival angle
> data, most of the action is in the 12 to 20 degree range and also in
> the 2 to 8 degree range.
>
> I've been through a slew of calculations in EZNEC and found it very
> difficult to make much improvement using vertical type antennas.  It
> appears that over average type ground, one needs at least 3 phased
> verticals to equal this crummy dipole.  I guess it is the ground
> reflection effect that the dipole benefits from which is hard to
> overcome.  It seems that one would be better off trying to raise the
> dipole to 100'+ than mess around with vertical arrays.  It appears
> that the cost could actually be lower.  Alternatively, a two-wire
> horizontal array might be a better bet.  One could almost certainly
> pick up 2-3 db even with a sloppy wire implementation.
>
> I really wonder how the 4 sq arrays achieve the benefits guys claim
> for them.  Alternatively, the YTAD arrival angles can't be the sole
> measure for design.
>
> On another issue, trying to lower the angle of radiation from a 160M
> inverted L.  I did a bunch of sensitivity studies from 40' vertical
> wire height to 110' vertical wire heights.  This managed to lower the
> lobe only 2 degrees.  Conclusion:  Messing around with the height of
> the vertical radiator won't help much.  So what's left?   Here
> horizontal wire choices are nil.
>
> It seems that on these lower frequency bands, one quickly hits a wall
> and obtaining significant improvments requires draconian efforts.
>
> Then there is the other solution to stronger signals some guys
> employ....
>
> 73 de Brian/K3KO
>
> List Sponsor: Are you thinking about installing a tower this summer?
Call us
> for information on our fabulous Trylon Titan self-supporting towers -
up to
> 96-feet for less than $2000! at 888-833-3104 <A
HREF="http://www.ChampionRadio.com">
> www.ChampionRadio.com</A>
>
> -----
> FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
> Submissions:              towertalk@contesting.com
> Administrative requests:  towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
> Problems:                 owner-towertalk@contesting.com
>
>



List Sponsor: Are you thinking about installing a tower this summer? Call us
for information on our fabulous Trylon Titan self-supporting towers - up to
96-feet for less than $2000! at 888-833-3104 <A HREF="http://www.ChampionRadio.com">
www.ChampionRadio.com</A>

-----
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
Submissions:              towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-towertalk@contesting.com