ad: ProAudio-1

Opinions on Vertical Antennas?

Discussion in 'Antennas, Feedlines, Towers & Rotors' started by WC3T, Oct 2, 2015.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-2
ad: Subscribe
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: Left-3
ad: L-MFJ
ad: K5AB-Elect-1
  1. W9XMT

    W9XMT Ham Member QRZ Page

    Below is a comparison of the first pattern I posted with the same NEC model relocated so that the bottom of the lower arm was 0.1m above 5 mS/m earth. Ground reflections are present in both patterns, however the peak gain at the lower elevation is about 1 dB less, and the feedpoint Z is 98 -j 1 ohms.

    However some might not want the safety hazard from possible, easy contact with the lower arm of the dipole near the earth.

    I'll pass on doing the other suggested configurations, though.

    [​IMG]
     
  2. KM1H

    KM1H Ham Member QRZ Page

    Id say the low one picked up 26 Ohms of pure ground R since the antenna wasnt detuned from resonance, helped broaden the bandwidth too Id guess.

    The same issue exists with the commercial quasi vertical dipoles
     
  3. WA7DXZ

    WA7DXZ Ham Member QRZ Page

    I have the Hustler. Very narrow on 75/80, works well roof mounted WITH radials. Less well ground mounted.
    Buy the Hustler
     
  4. WZ7U

    WZ7U Ham Member QRZ Page

    I built mine for 40 meters as a quarter wave ground plane with elevated radials. Not everyone has access to that size a bamboo sprig, but if you do by all means go for it.
     
  5. NH7RO

    NH7RO Ham Member QRZ Page

    Gotta love three-and-a-half year-old thread resurrections, ha ha! Makes me wonder what the record is...:p
     
  6. AH7I

    AH7I Ham Member QRZ Page

    Why can't you put a vertical in the middle of the leach field?
     
  7. AH7I

    AH7I Ham Member QRZ Page

    Just noticed. I'm not in the habit of checking back to the OP date. :)
    Perhaps someone will register anon and resurrect old flame ridden posts.
     
  8. AJ6O

    AJ6O Ham Member QRZ Page

    I used a "4BTV" for many years, and thought it was very good antenna, but compared to what? I had nothing to compared it to. I am a firm believer that every ham needs many many antennas so they can A/B between them to hear which one is the best to use for a particular station or direction. I really like verticals for transmitting, and not so much for receiving, unless the band conditions are favorable. Beverage, and or NVIS antennas I find to be the best for receiving, at any time of the day.
     
    WB5THT likes this.
  9. NK7Z

    NK7Z Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

  10. N4UP

    N4UP Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    In the past I have tried several multi-band verticals, with and without decent radial fields, with mixed success.

    Now I have two low-band verticals, both in the woods. One is a DX Engineering 160 meter Thunderbolt with 76 x 130 foot radials, and about 350 feet from the radio room. The other is a DX Engineering 8040 Thunderbolt with 64 x 65 foot radials, and about 150 feet from the radio room.

    In my experience they work extremely well despite being in the woods, especially for DX ( I recently completed DXCC on 80 meters and I am now well on my way to 100 countries on 160 meters ). I did thin out the trees before installation, so the trees are 10-20 feet apart and none are very close to the vertical elements. The main problem with trees, for me, was the root systems which made it challenging to lay buried radials, but I am glad I persevered. For the two antennas, I have about 2.5 miles of buried radials.

    What surprised me, though, was the relatively low noise, which I attribute to being in the country and far from other homes, power lines, etc. The two verticals are both quieter than any of my ( previous ) dipoles. Of course I also have beverage antennas, in another section of the woods, for even lower noise.
     

Share This Page