{OT} - On the subject of "best" portable antennas

[stan levandowski]

I have used the Ventenna HPp, several of the PAR ENDFEDZ, my own half
wave contraptions, and random wires and counterpoises.  They all *work*.
The trick is to agree on the the term *work* and I don't think that's
practically possible because there are just too many variables.

The Fall 2011 (Volume 52, Number 4, page 50) issue of QRP Quarterly has
a reprint of an excellent classic article by Joe Everhart, N2CX on the
subject of portable antennas.  It's practical, down-to-earth, and
understandable even by those who don't anything about antenna theory.
There is no math in this article.

Well worth the effort to locate for all those interested in making the
most of QRP-on-the-go.

73, Stan WB2LQF


______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[N0AZZ]

Stan

I have that printed thanks for pointing me to it and another resource. For
all the other comments I have made a sub-folder in my KX3 email folder for
the antenna ones for reference.

Another question what seems to be a minimum height for the Par to be
effective? Yes I know higher is better trying to get a handle on this for an
end fed. I have no experience with this type of antenna and thinking of
field use and supports.

Fred/N0AZZ

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of stan levandowski
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 11:08 AM
Cc: Elecraft List
Subject: [Elecraft] {OT} - On the subject of "best" portable antennas

I have used the Ventenna HPp, several of the PAR ENDFEDZ, my own half wave
contraptions, and random wires and counterpoises.  They all *work*.
The trick is to agree on the the term *work* and I don't think that's
practically possible because there are just too many variables.

The Fall 2011 (Volume 52, Number 4, page 50) issue of QRP Quarterly has a
reprint of an excellent classic article by Joe Everhart, N2CX on the subject
of portable antennas.  It's practical, down-to-earth, and understandable
even by those who don't anything about antenna theory.
There is no math in this article.

Well worth the effort to locate for all those interested in making the most
of QRP-on-the-go.

73, Stan WB2LQF


______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2221 / Virus Database: 2639/5563 - Release Date: 01/28/13

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[stan levandowski]

The PAR (actually now LNRPrecision) antennas, as far as I can see,
follow the same basic rules as "the dipole rules."  I've used them as
Inverted Vs, Inverted Ls, flat tops, and slopers.  My personal favorite
method is the inverted "L" with a 33' fiberglass telescoping pole.  This
gets the maximum radiation point up nice and high.  I deploy my "L" at
50/50 (half vertical, half horizontal) .  If there is no other support
available, I just hang the PAR from the pole and use it as an end fed
vertical.  73, Stan WB2LQF

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 1:03 PM, Fred Smith wrote:


> Another question what seems to be a minimum height for the Par to be
> effective? Yes I know higher is better trying to get a handle on this
> for an
> end fed. I have no experience with this type of antenna and thinking
> of
> field use and supports.
>
> Fred/N0AZZ
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[N1EU]

N0AZZ wrote

Another question what seems to be a minimum height for the Par to be
effective? Yes I know higher is better trying to get a handle on this for an
end fed. I have no experience with this type of antenna and thinking of
field use and supports.

Fred, in terms of angle of radiation versus height, it will behave similar to a dipole.  If you can get it up a half wavelength or higher in the air, great, but it will work well only a quarter wave off the ground (with higher angle of radiation).  If the ground slopes down in the direction of propagation, it doesn't have to be high at all.  I used it once on a mountain summit about 6ft off the ground and it worked like gangbusters.

73,
Barry N1EU

[k6dgw]

Actually, it IS a half-wave dipole, period.  The ends are open circuits,
consequently they exhibit the impedance of open circuits [very high],
and the current, which creates most of the radiation, is in the center.
  Their radio advantage is that it is somewhat easier to elevate the
high current portion of the wire.  Logistically, they're light, small,
easily transported, and not hard to deploy.

They require some matching legerdemain to get your TX to cram power into
the several thousand ohm end of the wire, but a half-wave dipole is a
half-wave dipole, regardless of where you feed it.  The familiar
Buddipole in one of the horizontal configurations is an off-center-fed
loaded half-wave dipole.  Efficiency suffers of course because much of
the electrical length is in the two inductors which don't radiate much,
but I used one successfully for several years.  Pretty heavy though.

Don't overlook small magnetic loops such as the Alexloop [a bit pricey]
or any of the much cheaper home brew versions.  They are essentially
insensitive to ground.  I sold my BP and got an Alex, and it works at
least as good as the BP and probably a little better, comes in a small
canvas carrying case, sets up on a light tripod about 2 meters high,
QSY's 40 to 10 in an instant with the turn of a knob.  Setup/teardown
takes about 5 mins max.  Several of the NA SOTA group have them and find
them very effective.

73,

Fred K6DGW
- Northern California Contest Club
- CU in the 2013 Cal QSO Party 5-6 Oct 2013
- www.cqp.org

On 1/28/2013 11:03 AM, N1EU wrote:

> Fred, in terms of angle of radiation versus height, it will behave similar
> to a dipole.  If you can get it up a half wavelength or higher in the air,
> great, but it will work well only a quarter wave off the ground (with higher
> angle of radiation).  If the ground slopes down in the direction of
> propagation, it doesn't have to be high at all.  I used it once on a
> mountain summit about 6ft off the ground and it worked like gangbusters.


______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html