[TowerTalk] Vertical dipoles

[Ian Hill - K8MM]

John Tait wrote:
> Hi Jim..
>
> Jim Brown wrote:
>   
>> BTW -- as I've observed in that tutorial, a vertical dipole is not 
>> a very good antenna, primarily because reflections from ground 
>> give it a rather poor vertical pattern. :) This is clear from the 
>> NEC model, and on-the-air tests yield the same result. The 
>> vertical works, but an inverted Vee hung at the same height from 
>> the same support works a LOT better. 
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Jim K9YC
>>   
>>     
>    I'd have to disagree with that statement. I have both vertical 
> dipoles and  inverted Vs for 80 and 160m.
>  The Verticals are separated from the Vs by about 500 yds, so they don't 
> "see" each other. They are all at about 55ft at the highest point. Both 
> inverted Vs are good general purpose antennae, but are at their best for 
> local high angle stuff. The verticals amaze me..'specially the 160m one. 
> It has only got 45ft of wire that radiates..ie. the vertical part. It 
> completely out-performs the inverted V on the long haul, and has gotten 
> me 190 countries on top band. Not bad for a 45 ft radiator and NO ground 
> system.   http://www.iol.ie/~bravo/low_band_antennae.htm#My%20TX%20Antennae
>      Of course, if you compare them at a height of 300ft, that'd be a 
> completely different story.
>
>           Vy 73
>                  John EI7BA
>    
>
>
>   
I have the same antenna set up as EI7BA and I agree with what he says. 
The vertical dipoles almost always beat my Inverted-V's on the long haul 
stuff. The Inverted-V can be equal to or slightly better than the 
vertical dipoles on a few occasions around sunrise or sunset when the DX 
arrives from a higher angle. Vertical dipoles are good low band antennas.

Ian - K8MM