[TowerTalk] Inverted Vee vs. Dipole QRN

[D. Scott MacKenzie]

That only assumes that the dipole is up high enough to matter - and to show
the 2 typical lobes - this would have to be at least 1 wavelength - and more
than likely, substantially higher - like 3-4 wavelengths.  Other than that -
they are virtually identical - both have vertical and horizontal
components - especially at low (less than 1 wavelength)......

No difference other than convenience.

Scott

-----Original Message-----
From: towertalk-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:towertalk-bounces at contesting.com]On Behalf Of Bill Turner
Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 11:06 AM
To: K4SAV
Cc: towertalk at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Inverted Vee vs. Dipole QRN


ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On Thu, 02 Nov 2006 16:51:32 -0600, K4SAV <RadioIR at charter.net> wrote:


>An inverted vee is not more susceptible to QRN than a dipole.

------------ REPLY FOLLOWS ------------

I have to disagree, for two reasons:

1. An inverted vee has a vertical component of radiation, and man-made
noise is predominantly vertically polarized, so an inverted vee will
pick up more man-made noise than a dipole.

2. An inverted vee with an apex angle of about 90 degrees is almost
perfectly omnidirectional in the azimuth plane, whereas a dipole is
quite directional, having sharp nulls off the ends. If you are lucky
enough to have the dipole's end pointed toward a noise source, the
dipole will be quieter than the vee.

Bill, W6WRT












_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk