[Antennas] Want HF No Radials Vertical

Mon, 19 Jan 2004 13:08:13 -0600

Re the last paragraph (more metal the better).  Hear, hear!  As the late
Sam Harris, W1FZQ (I think; it;s been a long time since he became SK)
would say, "If it stays up, it ain't big enough!"

Dave          W9LYA
What wrought doG hath?

On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 13:00:20 -0500 (EST) "Ron W7MRR"
<[email protected]> writes:
> 
> Hi Hue:
> 
>    Actually, a vertical dipole, assuming there are no traps, is full 
> size while the "radialless verticals" often use a loaded 
> counterpoise [with a big rf choke to minimize the rf backup] to 
> electrically match the vertical radiator.  All in all, the vertical 
> dipole as defined above will be a far superior antenna to any of the 
> radialless verticals currently being sold.  No offense to those who 
> have invested in such commerically offered antennas, but it just 
> isn't a very good performer.
> 
>    Now everytime the subject of radialless verticals is discussed on 
> this usergroup, someone gets their nose out of joint.  We hear 
> countless stories of working so many countries or getting an S9 from 
> Outer Mongolia.  Such anecdotal evidence, while encouraging to hear, 
> gives very little insight as to the efficiencies of the antenna.  In 
> most cases, the success relates to the location of the antenna [near 
> salt water, on top of a hill, etc.], band conditions or to the 
> overall determination of the operator.  
> 
>    This is one area where it is fair to say, the more metal in the 
> air (and the higher), the better the antenna will perform.  Applying 
> this formula to radialless verticals tells us as a group they will 
> not perform as well as full size antennas would at the same QTH.
> 
> Ron W7MRR
> 
> 
> 
>  --- On Sun 01/18, Hue Miller < [email protected] > wrote:
> From: Hue Miller [mailto: [email protected]]
> To: [email protected]
> Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2004 14:45:12 -0800
> Subject: Re: [Antennas] Want HF No Radials Vertical
> 
> <br>----- Original Message ----- <br>From: "Ron & Madhavi" 
> <[email protected]><br>Cc: <[email protected]><br>Sent: 
> Sunday, January 18, 2004 9:19 AM<br>Subject: Re: [Antennas] Want HF 
> No Radials Vertical<br><br>> If ou have no space for radials I would 
> recommend you try a vertical dipole<br>> (even if it is 
> loaded).<br>> <br>> 73,<br>> Ron<br><br>But, isn't  "vertical dipole" 
> just what these no-radial antennas are? They're not<br>Zepp 
> antennas, so they have to be somehow balanced  (loaded) at each 
> side<br>of the feedpoint.<br>If this is true, what you mean is a 
> "longer vertical dipole", one made out of a <br>wire that is longer 
> than the 3-7 meter long single element vertical mast. Or??<br>-Hue 
> Miller<br>- - - <br><br>Your moderator for this list is:<br>Larry 
> Wilson KE1HZ 
>
[email protected]<br>_______________________________________
________<br>Antennas 
> mailing 
>
list<br>[email protected]<br>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listin
fo/antennas<br>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
> The most personalized portal on the Web!
> - - - 
> 
> Your moderator for this list is:
> Larry Wilson KE1HZ [email protected]
> _______________________________________________
> Antennas mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/antennas
> 
> 