Posted by
Jim Brown-10 on
Dec 08, 2018; 12:51am
URL: http://elecraft.85.s1.nabble.com/Flumoxed-tp7646765p7646936.html
On 12/7/2018 12:55 PM, Dick Dickinson wrote:
> Why is there so much promotion of dipole antennas over inverted vee type antennas?
As has been noted, an inverted vee is a compromise dipole -- the sort of
thing you can rig with a single support. A flat dipole with its center
at the same height as the inv vee will have a dB or two more gain, and
the directional pattern will be the classic "figure-eight" pattern with
broad peaks broadside to the wire and nulls off the ends. Inverted vees
tend to lose the nulls off their ends. All this stuff is in the ARRL
Handbook and Antenna Book which every ham should own and study as we
have time.
For rigging heights that are possible for most hams, horizontal antennas
for 160 or 80, and 40M over flat terrain produce more gain at greater
height. It is a fallacy that an antenna must be low to work short
distances. Low antennas radiate LESS signal at high angles than high
ones. I published a study of this several years ago. It's here.
http://k9yc.com/AntennaPlanning.pdf beginning on page 10. Field
strength at 70 degrees vertical elevation just starts to fall off as it
is raised to 1/3 wavelength. That's 45 ft on 40M, 90 ft on 80M, 180 ft
on 160M.
73, Jim K9YC
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home:
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraftHelp:
http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htmPost: mailto:
[hidden email]
This list hosted by:
http://www.qsl.netPlease help support this email list:
http://www.qsl.net/donate.htmlMessage delivered to
[hidden email]