[GCARC] Club site 80-160M trap dipole

[Tony Starr]

Vinnie,

Correct on both counts.  Even the best built traps, if you could get them,
would limit the VSWR bandwidth compared to a full size, non-trapped
antenna.   And for DX on 160, verticals rule the roost.  Our best bet would
probably be an inverted L, if DX is what we are looking for.  Any dipole on
160 that is less than 100 feet off the ground will radiate mostly up, and
it doesn't matter which way the ends of the dipole are facing.

Tony K3TS

On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 7:39 PM Vinnie Sallustio <yankees_1996 at hotmail.com>
wrote:

> Traps appear to be out. Both companies (Unadilla and Spi-Ro) are out of
> business.
>
> I would love a permanent 160M antenna. One that would do DXing. Apparently
> the dipole would have limited DXing abilities.
>
> Vinnie N4NYY
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* JOHN HILL <john.e.hill at comcast.net>
> *Sent:* Monday, November 9, 2020 7:33 PM
> *To:* Vinnie Sallustio <yankees_1996 at hotmail.com>; WA2FZB, Tony Starr <
> tstarr1450 at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* kb2ayu at comcast.net <kb2ayu at comcast.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [GCARC] Club site 80-160M trap dipole
>
> Guys,
>
> Are you proposing a temporary or permanent 160m antenna?  If it's
> permanent, it needs to be compatible with the Elecraft KPA1500 that I plan
> on purchasing not too far in the future. It can handle a 3:1 SWR at rated
> power, 10:1 with exciter pass-through.
>
> I am having problems visualizing the antennas discussed so far.
>
> 1) Regarding the "ladder line dipole", was the ladder line used for the
> antenna, the feedline or both? How was the feedline routed? Was the antenna
> tuner required at the base of the tower matching the balanced ladder line
> to 50 ohm coax?
>
> 2) Regarding adding a pair of 1/4 wave 160m wires in parallel with the
> existing 1/4 wave 80m wires, wat does "turning the wires so that they do no
> face each other" mean?  Ideally, the 80m and 160 wires would be
> perpendicular to each other in the plan view, right?  That would mean that
> the 160m lobes would be roughly North and South, which wouldn't be ideal
> for DX.
>
> 3) Personally, I think that traps would be the best option since the 80m
> and 160m antennas would point in the same direction and a local antenna
> tuner should not be required.  I would envision the two sides of the
> antenna being primarily supported by ropes attached to the traps with a
> second ropes attached to the ends.
>
> FYI, the present SWR observed by the IC-7300 is 1.8:1 on the 80m antenna.
>
> John W2HUV
>
> On 11/08/2020 9:35 PM Vinnie Sallustio < yankees_1996 at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Tony,
>
> This is a better idea. The 2 trap companies are both out of business. A
> fan dipole is a great idea.
>
> Vinnie
>
> ________________________________
> From: Tony Starr < tstarr1450 at gmail.com>
> Sent: Sunday, November 8, 2020 9:32 PM
> To: Vinnie Sallustio < Yankees_1996 at hotmail.com>
> Cc: GCARC < gcarc at mailman.qth.net>
> Subject: Re: [GCARC] Club site 80-160M trap dipole
>
> Vinnie,
>
> It would not be hard to do, if you had the traps, or could build them. The
> problem is that a good pair of 80m traps is hard to come by, and if you do
> find them, they may be heavy. The easy solution is just to add a pair of
> wires to the feed point for 160m , making it into a dual-band dipole
> similar to a fan dipole. This is what I did to my 40m dipole 4 years ago
> when I wanted to get on 80 meters, and it has served me well ever since
> then.
>
> If you turn the wires so that they are facing away from each other, you
> will not even have much interaction between the two bands. This project
> only requires 250 feet of wire, two insulators, and some rope. It would
> offer a lot of return for a minimum of investment.
>
> Tony K3TS
>
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 8, 2020 at 8:53 PM Vinnie Sallustio < Yankees_1996 at hotmail.com
> <mailto: Yankees_1996 at hotmail.com>> wrote:
> Is there any way the current 80M dipole can be turned into a 80-160M trap
> dipole? 160M is that elusive band for many people because of space
> constraints. I don't use the clubhouse, but would bring my rig over there
> to get on 160M. It's the only band I cannot get on at home. We seem to have
> the space for one. Why don't we utilize it?
>
> Vinnie N4NYY
> ______________________________________________________________
> GCARC mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/gcarc
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto: GCARC at mailman.qth.net<mailto: GCARC at mailman.qth.net>
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> ______________________________________________________________
> GCARC mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/gcarc
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto: GCARC at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>