[TowerTalk] Was Radials... 160m High angle vs. low angle
jwagner at dxengineering.com
Fri Jun 16 16:33:23 EDT 2006
> Speaking of low wire antennas, what was used on Peter I for 160?
> 73, Keith NM5G
> I cannot speak for the entire world, but here on the right
> coast of the usa sometimes 160 signals do come in quite high
> at sunrise or sunset.
> Not every day but it does happen. Once in a while even on
> long haul dx the inverted vee at 60 feet will beat the
> vertical...I have never seen it other than during the grey
> line, but that does not mean it does not happen. I'd say
> vertical is better 95% of the time and the vee only about 5%
> of the time.
> My best memory example is T32 a couple of years ago at my
> sunrise. He was
> S9 on the inverted vee for about 15 minutes. I worked him
> easily on the vee, switched to my club call and could not
> raise a peep out of him on the vertical. You can indeed work
> dx on 160 with a low dipole. You will need lots and lots of
> persistence tho. Kind of like doing qrpp on 20 with a normal
> antenna farm. 73 bob de w9ge
> Jim Jarvis wrote:
> >Having a 160m inverted vee with the apex at 60' is like having a 10m
> >inverted vee with the apex at 4'. It's a cloud burner.
> >A 160m dipole at 100' is a LOW antenna.
As far as I know a Battle Creek Special and a three element wire beam was
used on 160m.
More information about the TowerTalk