[Antennas] Multiband Vertical Versus Multiband Dipole (HF)

Tue, 29 Oct 2002 17:56:55 -0000

Subject: RE: [Antennas] Multiband Vertical Versus Multiband Dipole (HF)

> Why does everyone discuss this subject from standpoint that a vertical is
by
> default not a dipole??

A habit I guess...

> Can anyone comment on the relative performance of
> the a vertical dipole and a quarter wave with (good) radials?  I would
also
> be interested to hear how important is the distance from ground to the
> bottom of a vertial dipole?

Get your hands on a copy of  "Another Way to Look at Vertical Antennas" by
Rudy Severns N6LF (March 1999 QEX)...   Also, take a look at
 http://www.iol.ie/~bravo/low_band_antennae.htm

John  EI7BA

> Cheers
> Jan (VA7JNR)
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dave Fouchey [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 6:56 AM
> > To: Linden, Mike (BRC-Hes); [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [Antennas] Multiband Vertical Versus Multiband
> > Dipole (HF)
> >
> >
> > Mike I can't provide definitive data but only anecdotal
> > experience. I have
> > used Dipoles and verticals often over the years.  Dipoles in
> > general have
> > behaved better for me than MOST verticals. the exception was
> > when I used
> > verticals over a very extensive ground plain, in this case
> > salt water, at
> > which point they blew the Dipoles away for DX performance.
> > the only caveat
> > there was that they were prone to pick up more impulse noise and storm
> > static than dipoles but the difference in long haul performance was
> > striking. As it is I use both to this day, with a good ground
> > radial system
> > under the vertical. Your mileage may vary of course.
> >
> >
> > 73's
> > Dave
> > WA4EMR
> > Sterling Heights, MI
> >
> > At 08:01 AM 10/28/02 -0600, Linden, Mike (BRC-Hes) wrote:
> > >  A lot of folks still say that a vertical radiates equally
> > poorly in all
> > >directions (they should only be used if you don't have space
> > for a "real"
> > >antenna). After researching it a bit, it is my contention that such
> > >verticals don't have an adequate ground system or are being
> > used in areas
> > >with poor ground conductivity. My goal is to have some sort
> > of support for
> > >most of the bands between 10 and 80 meters.
> > >
> > >  I'm currently running a homebrew multiband coaxial trap
> > dipole in my attic
> > >at about 25 feet. However, I'm thinking ahead to when I have
> > enough time and
> > >when I can convince my housing association to let me install
> > some outdoor
> > >antennas. My two HF options would be a multiband vertical (I like the
> > >Butternut HF9V) or a multiband dipole (I've seen some
> > designs that only add
> > >significant loading on the lowest bands).
> > >
> > >  Personally, from an aesthetic point of view, I like the
> > vertical. I would
> > >be able to install it more than 30 feet from my 2-story
> > vinyl sided house
> > >and would have enough room for 30 foot radials in all directions. The
> > >antenna would be ground mounted. Ground conductivity in my
> > area (far west
> > >Chicago suburbs) is quite good. My primary concern with the
> > vertical would
> > >be increased noise due to vertical polarization. Any comments on how
> > >manageable the increased noise is and how much worse it is
> > than a dipole?
> > >Based on my research, the primary benefit of a vertical is
> > the low angle of
> > >radiation that results when used with a good ground system.
> > >
> > >  The dipole installation would not be as aesthetically
> > pleasing as the
> > >vertical (at least from my perspective -- hi!). Due to the
> > lack of older
> > >trees in my new subdivision and the layout of my lot, the
> > dipole would have
> > >to run from my house straight into the back yard such that
> > the feed point
> > >would drop in my back yard 30 or 40 feed from my house.
> > Probably the best
> > >height I would be able to manage would be about 30 feet
> > above ground --
> > >perhaps a bit lower at the far end -- I would also need to
> > come up with some
> > >sort of middle support. Based in my research, the benefit of
> > the dipole
> > >would be lower cost (about $100) and lower noise level.
> > However, at 30 feet,
> > >the angle of radiation would not be very good for DX.
> > >
> > >  I'd appreciate feedback from folks who have had the chance
> > to compare the
> > >performance of multiband verticals with multiband dipoles.
> > >
> > >  Thanks, Michael N9BDF
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >- - -
> > >
> > >Your moderator for this list is:
> > >Larry Wilson KE1HZ [email protected]
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >Antennas mailing list
> > >[email protected]
> > >http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/antennas
> >
> > - - -
> >
> > Your moderator for this list is:
> > Larry Wilson KE1HZ [email protected]
> > _______________________________________________
> > Antennas mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/antennas
> >
> - - -
>
> Your moderator for this list is:
> Larry Wilson KE1HZ [email protected]
> _______________________________________________
> Antennas mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/antennas
>
>