[FARC] Right, Right, Right

[Ernest Hansen]

Congrats on the awards Jim.  I just have a small tower next to the house and the long wire runs from the side of the house to the side of the tower about 15 feet up. Then out to a 15 feet pole in the yard and then down to a fence post along the back garden fence. I have some room so it is about 200 feet long.  Works nice on 160 and 80 but a little directional on 40.  I sat next to you a couple Chrismas's ago at the FARC Chrismas meeting and remember you describing your antenna. I think that sometimes we follow the book to much.  The old saying is true also.  If it works don't fix it.  This spring I am going to put up a dipole, if I can find some trees to support the ends. Not many of them around. I should have planted two trees 200 feet appart when I was younger. I would have had nice supports for a dipole by now. I bet my low long wire works just as good?
   
  Ernie

M and J Gillespie <gillesmj at earthlink.net> wrote:
  Ernie,
I am like you. Somehow all these ideas of cancelling out and such are 
theory and those who consider themselves "professional" hams think anything 
less is no good. Well, I have a small back yard 25 x 25 feet in size and I 
load a long wire like you do with an l-nework tuner. It is about 65 feet 
long and is bent into a square about 32 by 32 by 32 feet and is nailed to a 
wooden fence with insulators. Probably one of the worst imaginable antennsa 
ankwhere but it works in the absence of anything better.In the pasts 7 years 
I have worked over 200 countries and have worked all zones except two wih 
it. I do have a WAZ certificate. Just today I worked all continents except 
Asia. The anatenna is very short on 160 but works there. It will load on 
all bands 160 through 10 including the so calledd WARC bands. One thing, the 
windom will work well on even harmonic bands but will not work on odd 
multlples (15 meters).
I would love to chat with you sometimes about your antenna set up.

Best of 73s
Jim, K3DQ
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ernest Hansen" 
To: "Frederick, Maryland ARC" 
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 3:15 PM
Subject: Re: [FARC] Wrong, Wrong, Wrong


> Kirk,
>
> I have been reading bits and pieces of your emails. Thank you for 
> pointing these facts out. I was not aware of the cancellation. I have been 
> working the low bands for years with an end fed long wire with nothing 
> more than a coil and capacitor (L-network) for a tuner. The problem with 
> them is if you cut the wire long enough for 80 and 160 meters like I do, 
> they get very directive at the higher frequencies.
>
> 73, Ernie Hansen, K3VVV
>
>
> Kirk Talbott wrote:
> I need to apologize to Dave Matthews and all of you because I have never 
> been so wrong about any subject, ever. It is very likely that I am still 
> wrong in what follows.
>
> First, I may have found but am not sure, the reason for my 80 meter dipole 
> problems and gremlins. I read something in an ARRL handbook discussing 
> radiation fields and radiation resistance. I didn't understand any of it 
> and was quite bored until I read a paragraph about inverted vee dipoles 
> that piqued my interest. The paragraph essentially said that if the angle 
> of the vee at the apex of an inverted vee dipole is too sharp (approaching 
> 90 degrees) the fields tend to cancel out rather than radiate. This type 
> of an antenna has a low value of radiation resistance. Another paragraph 
> in the same section indicated that, "More current is needed to power an 
> antenna with a low value of radiation resistance in comparison with an 
> antenna with a higher value of radiation resistance and the effect of 
> losses in devices such as matching networks, ground systems, and similar 
> devices where currents are required to produce the radiated field become 
> significant. A point may be reached where
> more power is dissipated than radiated."
>
> The feed point of my inverted vee is up on a TV tower approximately 30 ft. 
> Each dipole conductor extends approximately 67 ft. down into the front and 
> back yards attached via insulators and ropes to a tree up about 15 feet on 
> one side and to a 6 ft. 4x4 post on the other. The antenna is oriented in 
> an almost perfect "L" shape directly over the house. Therein lies the 
> problem, a perfect "L" shape implies 90 degrees at the feed point. I read 
> somewhere else, that the canceling out of the radiating fields can cause 
> increased RFI.
>
> Could this possibly be the answer or am I totally off the mark again? I'll 
> keep trying.
>
> 73
> KB3ONM
> Kirk
>
> _______________________________________________
> FARC mailing list
> FARC at mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/farc
>
> _______________________________________________
> FARC mailing list
> FARC at mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/farc 

_______________________________________________
FARC mailing list
FARC at mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/farc