![]() |
vert vs dipole
i was wondering.. ... currently i have a horz center fed dipole it's not big but my roofside sgc at least keeps the swr's nice. it's about 20ft off the surface of my roof wich is about 175ft off the ground ... i was thinking about adding a verticle antenna such as the challanger(gap) or such... what i ponder is what if any improvements i might see over the dipole or if under what 'conditions' it might be better --if at all?? tnx |
On Sun, 08 May 2005 00:52:13 GMT, ml wrote:
what i ponder is what if any improvements i might see over the dipole or if under what 'conditions' it might be better --if at all?? Hi Myles, Probably none, or at best, different from the dipole, but only on alternate days (as an average, no difference). 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
In article ,
Richard Clark wrote: On Sun, 08 May 2005 00:52:13 GMT, ml wrote: what i ponder is what if any improvements i might see over the dipole or if under what 'conditions' it might be better --if at all?? Hi Myles, Probably none, or at best, different from the dipole, but only on alternate days (as an average, no difference). 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC hmm tnx for the reply, on one hand i sorta thought that might be the case but at times i wondered if it might not be, ... hope your well m |
"ml" wrote in message
i was wondering.. ... currently i have a horz center fed dipole it's not big but my roofside sgc at least keeps the swr's nice. it's about 20ft off the surface of my roof wich is about 175ft off the ground ... i was thinking about adding a verticle antenna such as the challanger(gap) or such... what i ponder is what if any improvements i might see over the dipole or if under what 'conditions' it might be better --if at all?? One thing to keep in mind is a horizontal antenna by nature is more quiet antenna and is going to be someone directional. A vertial is going to be omio direction and prolly better at working DX because it's angle of radiation is going to be lower. Adair |
ml wrote:
what i ponder is what if any improvements i might see over the dipole or if under what 'conditions' it might be better --if at all?? Here's some comparison radiation patterns on 40m for the horizontal and vertical antennas that I had up a year ago. The vertical suffered from 2 S-units higher (local) noise. http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp/dipvsver.htm -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
I had a dipole and vertical when I lived in the Four Corners and the
vertical was so noisy on receive that it was just about useless but I did use it on transmit. Farmington is at 5600 ft. elev. and quite dry with dry rock soil. Later when I moved to Tulsa where the ground and air are always damp the vertical was a lot quieter and useable on receive. Radials do make a noteable differnce, the more radials the better but no on receive. Lots of noise is vertically polarized and drier air seems to have more. -- 73 Hank WD5JFR "ml" wrote in message ... i was wondering.. ... currently i have a horz center fed dipole it's not big but my roofside sgc at least keeps the swr's nice. it's about 20ft off the surface of my roof wich is about 175ft off the ground ... i was thinking about adding a verticle antenna such as the challanger(gap) or such... what i ponder is what if any improvements i might see over the dipole or if under what 'conditions' it might be better --if at all?? tnx |
On 40 meters, I have a vertical with two sloping radials with the top of the
vertical at 60 feet. I also have a full wave center-fed horizontal antenna that I use on 40, and that antenna is at 65 feet. 90% of the time, DX stations are stronger and/or more readable on the vertical than on the horizontal antenna. Likewise, 90% of the time USA stations east of the Mississippi (I'm in NC) are much stronger on the horizontal than on the vertical. However, there are those occasional days when many stations in the eastern USA are stronger on the vertical than the horizontal. If I'm working a USA contest or just want to participate in ECARs, MidCARS, or SouthCARS, I'll go with the horizontal. DX chasing is always done on the vertical. I can switch between the two for those rare exceptions. I'm in a pretty quiet area from a noise standpoint, and find no advantage to either antenna when it comes to noise. If you have no interest in DXing, I'd say just stick with the horizontal antenna. If the prime interest is DXing, then the vertical might be the way to go for you. An interesting variation that provides decent vertical and horizontal polarization is the center fed "L", where one half is horizontal and one is vertical, fed at the center with open wire line. That works remarkably well for me on 80/75 meters. 73, K8AC "ml" wrote in message ... i was wondering.. ... currently i have a horz center fed dipole it's not big but my roofside sgc at least keeps the swr's nice. it's about 20ft off the surface of my roof wich is about 175ft off the ground ... i was thinking about adding a verticle antenna such as the challanger(gap) or such... what i ponder is what if any improvements i might see over the dipole or if under what 'conditions' it might be better --if at all?? tnx |
Just out of curiosity, did you have an RF choke or resistor across the
vertical's feedpoint to bleed off static when you lived in Farmington? Roy Lewallen, W7EL Henry Kolesnik wrote: I had a dipole and vertical when I lived in the Four Corners and the vertical was so noisy on receive that it was just about useless but I did use it on transmit. Farmington is at 5600 ft. elev. and quite dry with dry rock soil. Later when I moved to Tulsa where the ground and air are always damp the vertical was a lot quieter and useable on receive. Radials do make a noteable differnce, the more radials the better but no on receive. Lots of noise is vertically polarized and drier air seems to have more. |
Roy
No I didn't know about a drain because until you mentioned it, I didn't know about it but it sounds like a good idea. Too bad I can't try it. -- 73 Hank WD5JFR "Roy Lewallen" wrote in message ... Just out of curiosity, did you have an RF choke or resistor across the vertical's feedpoint to bleed off static when you lived in Farmington? Roy Lewallen, W7EL Henry Kolesnik wrote: I had a dipole and vertical when I lived in the Four Corners and the vertical was so noisy on receive that it was just about useless but I did use it on transmit. Farmington is at 5600 ft. elev. and quite dry with dry rock soil. Later when I moved to Tulsa where the ground and air are always damp the vertical was a lot quieter and useable on receive. Radials do make a noteable differnce, the more radials the better but no on receive. Lots of noise is vertically polarized and drier air seems to have more. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:40 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com