[TAC] Antenna discussion

[Jeff]

At 09:14 PM 9/12/05, you wrote: (in part)

>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Hank Kohl" <hank.k8dd at gmail.com>
>To: "Thumb (MI) Area Contesters (and DX'ers)" <tac at mailman.qth.net>
>Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 10:44 AM
>Subject: Re: [TAC] Antenna discussion
>
>
>Yes, that's the one.  Is it in good enough shape to take?

Well, it's been deployed behind my barn for a couple years, anyway... 
hasn't come down yet.  So, structurally, I'd say it is in 
shape.  Need to do some testing to make sure the traps etc are still 
working like they should, and the SWR  is ok.  So, let me know if you 
want to give it a try.



>I remember:
>
>1. It was LOUD on 160. That's what people said when we worked them and what
>people said when we returned to 8-land.

Vertical is definitely the way to go on 160.  "pick-'em" on the other 
bands, I guess.

>2. It was a major part of our baggage. It strikes me it was in a long
>square-sided container with other things stuffed in around the antenna
>itself.

I still have the golf club case... don't know if you used it last 
time or not.  The antenna was designed to be as light and compact as 
possible and still survive moderately harsh wx.  The one that 
W0CD  designed as a dxpedition loaner, was MUCH more robust... and 
MUCH heavier, with longer pieces (6 foot, I think).

>3. It was securely tied to large trees. During the 60 mph nor'easter, the
>vertical did the "hula" all night, but was still standing in the morning.
Was it guyed at 3 levels?  It seems pretty rigid here, as far as 
movement... but, every installation is a little different in a 
dxpedition situation.

Jeff