[TowerTalk] Was Radials... 160m High angle vs. low angle

John Wagner 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.

John W8JJW

More information about the TowerTalk mailing list