[TowerTalk] dipole configuration

[Tom Osborne]

Hi All

It seems I read somewhere that on an antenna like this, it would be better 
if the bends were gentle, like through a piece of hose or something, instead 
of abrupt, like 2 wires tied to the hole of an insulator at right angles to 
each other.
Any truth to this or just another 'old wives tale'?  73
Tom W7WHY


> Blair,
>
> You've gotten some good inputs on your question.  Vertical polarization
> is definitely the way to go on 160m.  Given your space constraints, the
> K2KQ "Double-L", would be a good antenna for you.  See
> http://www.yccc.org/Articles/double_l.htm and
> http://www.yccc.org/Articles/Antennas/K2KQ/DBL-L.PPT   K2KQ shows a dual
> band (80-160) version, but you can just leave off the 80m wires if that
> band isn't of interest.  If you can't get the full height, you can
> lengthen the horizontal wires to keep the total length the same.  The
> impedance will be a bit lower with less vertical height.
>
> N0HR has done some modeling of this antenna and includes radiation
> patterns: http://www.n0hr.com/160m%20and%2080m%20Double%20L.htm
>
> This antenna has a lot of low angle signal, but also fills in the null
> somewhat at high angles, making it good for short haul work, too.  It
> will have a lot more bandwidth than an approach using loading coils and
> much more efficient than a low dipole.
>
> 73, Terry N6RY