|
Re: 80/160m Antenna
yes
======================== de N2MLP Brian Monroe County PA
========================
From: 070@... [mailto:070@...]
Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2017 12:09 AM To: 070@... Subject: Re: [070] 80/160m Antenna
John I am trying to picture this. Is it coax from rig to balun. Do you have a ground system for counterpoise.
I have lots of wire and can wind a 9:1 quick enuf. May have time B4 the snow to try something. Barry
Byron I get good results 80/160 with an end fed antenna 9:1 Balun and 30m of wire. you can zig zag if you don't have enough straight line. Best John KE4JB
|
|
|
|
Re: 80/160m Antenna
boat.anchor@...
John
I am trying to picture this. Is it coax from rig to balun. Do you have a ground system for counterpoise. I have lots of wire and can wind a 9:1 quick enuf. May have time B4 the snow to try something. Barry ---In 070@..., <poppajohnbower@...> wrote : Byron I get good results 80/160 with an end fed antenna 9:1 Balun and 30m of wire. you can zig zag if you don't have enough straight line. Best John KE4JB
|
|
|
|
Re: 80/160m Antenna
John Bower <poppajohnbower@...>
Byron I get good results 80/160 with an end fed antenna 9:1 Balun and 30m of wire. you can zig zag if you don't have enough straight line. Best John KE4JB
On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 12:47 PM, Bryon nnegrom@... [070] <070@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: 80/160m Antenna
JEFF WALSH
Barry ...one of my other hobbies is N scale model railroading ..... I have tried 160m scaled down to N scale and it didn't load up .... Jerry .... I never tried 160m in HO scale so I am unable to answer that one but on the serious side I am lucky and live on 10 acres with no restrictions of any kind ...... I have full length 1/2 wave home brew wire dipoles running all over the place for 10m thru 160m ..... I run the antenna's thru a MFJ 993B auto tuner ...... and it has been my experience that loading 160m thru my 80m dipole gets me about the same results as I switch back and forth between the 2 antennas in real time ....... I figure that the lack of difference now is because of the poor band conditions .... one day I will raise the 160m dipole higher as I threw it up in a hurry to participate in a PODXS contest one afternoon years ago .....seems like I am only on 160m now for PODXS contests .......raising it is not high on my to do list .... hi hi I also have a Mosley TA33 at 40 feet ....... Zero Five vertical {10m thru 40m} and I can confirm that a vertical is noisier I use to live in a deed restricted subdivision in FL with ZERO tolerance for ANY type of antenna so I know firsthand what many of you are going thru and sometimes we have our hands tied as far as antennas go .... so we have to make the best of a situation that unfortunately requires a compromise .... Jerry is right about the efficiency of a antenna in regards to trying to make up the length electrically .... My father was a Ham for 70 years and I will always remember him telling me what good is top of the line radio with a bottom of the line antenna setup ..... He told make sure you have money for the antenna setup also ... JEFF WALSH W3WMU #1673 BUBBAWOOD WORLDWIDE HEADQUARTERS STURGIS, MS.
On Wednesday, October 25, 2017 7:12 PM, "boat.anchor@... [070]" <070@...> wrote: More like "N" and that would probably go great with my QRP setup. QRP rig es QRP ant Barry ---In 070@..., wrote : If ya build it in HO scale (1:87 scale ) Jerry n9avy  From: "boat.anchor@... [070]" <070@...> To: 070@... Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 7:05 PM Subject: Re: [070] 80/160m Antenna Don't think I can cram that in my available 40' X 40' space. Barry
|
|
|
|
Re: 80/160m Antenna
Maybe Z if you're QRP !
From: "boat.anchor@... [070]" <070@...> To: 070@... Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 7:12 PM Subject: Re: [070] 80/160m Antenna More like "N" and that would probably go great with my QRP setup. QRP rig es QRP ant Barry ---In 070@..., wrote : If ya build it in HO scale (1:87 scale ) Jerry n9avy From: "boat.anchor@... [070]" <070@...> To: 070@... Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 7:05 PM Subject: Re: [070] 80/160m Antenna Don't think I can cram that in my available 40' X 40' space. Barry
|
|
|
|
Re: 80/160m Antenna
boat.anchor@...
More like "N" and that would probably go great with my QRP setup.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
QRP rig es QRP ant Barry ---In 070@..., <n9avy@...> wrote : If ya build it in HO scale (1:87 scale ) Jerry n9avy
From: "boat.anchor@... [070]" <070@...> To: 070@... Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 7:05 PM Subject: Re: [070] 80/160m Antenna Don't think I can cram that in my available 40' X 40' space. Barry
|
|
|
|
Re: 80/160m Antenna
If ya build it in HO scale (1:87 scale ) Jerry n9avy
From: "boat.anchor@... [070]" <070@...> To: 070@... Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 7:05 PM Subject: Re: [070] 80/160m Antenna Don't think I can cram that in my available 40' X 40' space. Barry ---In 070@..., <n9avy@...> wrote :
|
|
|
|
Re: 80/160m Antenna
boat.anchor@...
Don't think I can cram that in my available 40' X 40' space.
Barry ---In 070@..., <n9avy@...> wrote :
|
|
|
|
80/160m Antenna
Mike... You’re aimed in the right direction with the beverage. I had a beverage on 160m when I lived in So. 5-land... 817’ long, terminated in a ¼ watt, 50 ohm resistor about 5’ above ground...(whatever the top wire of a barbed wire fence is, agl) Many a time in the middle of a contest I had to put my “Bayou Reeboks”, (rubber boots) on and fight the critters and bugs to change that resistor ‘cause I x-mitted A L O T of power through it! Live and learn. One thing to look at is a 4-square, switchable x-mitting antenna. Doesn’t take acre’s of space and it works... Any antenna you build for 80 and/or 160?...Pay attention to the losses! I’m a true believer that it’s so easy to lose a db and dang near impossible to gain a db with the low power of the digital modes. I’ve discovered that if I only had privileges on the 160m band, there would a way to get something on the air... Steve, W3HF can tell you how far some intelligent ingenuity and necessity can go when it comes to antenna’s... Milt. n6mg 070-650 LONP #76 DXCC Honor Roll
From: 070@... [mailto:070@...]
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 3:24 PM To: 070@... Subject: RE: [070] 80/160m Antenna
As Jerry said… verticals ARE noisy.
I noticed someone mentioned an Inverted L. I love my Inverted L, but I’ll say that when I had my 160 meter loop, I would find myself transmitting on the Inverted L and receiving on the loop. Neither antenna heard better than the other, but the loop was MUCH quieter. Inverted L’s have a vertical component which contributes to the noise.
If I could only have one antenna , I’d probably go with the loop. It’d be a tough choice, but the sounds of silence are really nice when trying to pull out the weak ones.
I’d love to do a Beverage; might have to think about that!
73,
Mike WM4B
From: 070@... [mailto:070@...]
Byron:
There are some laws of physics/antennas you just can't ignore. An antenna that is a 1/2 wave length or longer will be more efficient than anything shorter. Sure you can use loading coil and such to make antenna appear electrically longer, but you still have an inefficient antenna... everything in electronics seems to be a trade off; you have to sacrifice one thing to get another. Just like in engineering you can build something better, but it may not be as good as what you had in the first place, but I don't know much about thatld. Did some tower work years ago and the crew tended to "over-engineer" things to err on safety side.
Anyhow, years ago a friend and I loaded up a 300 ft. AM broadcast tower on 160 in winter for some contest. Results were awful ... lots of noise and not many signals. Verticals tend to be noisy. Guess that's why some DXers on 160 use beverage antennas for receiving. Used to have a serious 160m station a few miles away which had 9 phased 110 ft verticals with a little tuning shack in middle. It belonged to K9DX and was operated remotely from his house 30 miles away; had a couple tours and it was awesome. All the hardware and antennas were expensive as well as the 80 acres of land it sat on. It gone now (sigh).
That was the ultimate DXers station and far out of most hams budget.
On the "poor hams" budget, some do quite well with limited antennas on 160m. Would suggest that you search for "160 meter antennas " on the web and find something that will work for you. A word of caution, ignore some of the claims made as every QTH is somewhat different with soil characteristics (soil conductivity, etc.) , height above average terrain, sources of interference, and so forth. Seems like some of the better 160m DXers live in areas where it's marshy near lakes, rivers and oceans... guess you could always flood your yard ?
Good luck !
Jerry n9avy
From: "Bryon nnegrom@... [070]" <070@...>
I'll see if I can get a mark up of my plot from Google Maps or something, but let me see if I can explain it a little.
I have lots of land around me. Though it isn't mine. I sit on about .65 acres of usable space. I have no major trees (anything taller than the gutter in the front yard). My antenna sits on the back corner of my house. It is a crank up tower about 40' (aluminum) with a K4KIO Hexbeam on it. Works really well...I think, this is my first setup. But, I can do a lot on 20 and 40 (even though it isn't necessarily intended for 40m). I have a tuner in my K3.
Out back of my house there is a large tree. I could probably get something up in there and connected to the tower. When the tower is lowered it sits about 14' (not including the antenna).
I have hesitated doing anything with this, because I do not want that in my line of sight out the back yard, at least not when it is going to be down and drooping.
I know to be efficient longer really is better. But, I just haven't found a great antenna that seems appealing and easy to put up without a lot of headache and trying to make things work when I have no idea what I'm doing with antennas. I'm a mechanical engineer with focus on medical devices, and antennas are still black magic to me!
What are your thoughts based on these comments?
|
|
|
|
Re: 80/160m Antenna
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
From: "Jerry n9avy@... [070]" <070@...> To: "070@..." <070@...> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 6:34 PM Subject: Re: [070] 80/160m Antenna Guys in Utah sound like Rhombics. 4 telephones poles a wave length (or 1/2 wave) with a bunch of wire wound around them. Probably needs more real estate. Jerry n9avy
|
|
|
|
Re: 80/160m Antenna
Guys in Utah sound like Rhombics. 4 telephones poles a wave length (or 1/2 wave) with a bunch of wire wound around them. Probably needs more real estate. Jerry n9avy
|
|
|
|
Re: 80/160m Antenna
W7RIV
I know what you mean about being less efficient. I guess the question is less efficient or nothing at all. That is where I'm at right now. I'll certainly dig into it more. I was curious what everyone here was using, sounds mostly like larger wire antennas rigged in their yards? There are 3 hams in Utah that have outrageous (and awesome) low band antennas. That are arranged in 4 corners, with many, many miles of radials, tuners, etc. They have excellent results. =) They all sit on around 5 acres or more as well. I love the hobby, and struggle with the antennas! Bryon, W7RIV
|
|
|
|
Re: 80/160m Antenna
Mike Besemer <mwbesemer@...>
As Jerry said… verticals ARE noisy.
I noticed someone mentioned an Inverted L. I love my Inverted L, but I’ll say that when I had my 160 meter loop, I would find myself transmitting on the Inverted L and receiving on the loop. Neither antenna heard better than the other, but the loop was MUCH quieter. Inverted L’s have a vertical component which contributes to the noise.
If I could only have one antenna , I’d probably go with the loop. It’d be a tough choice, but the sounds of silence are really nice when trying to pull out the weak ones.
I’d love to do a Beverage; might have to think about that!
73,
Mike WM4B
From: 070@... [mailto:070@...]
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 5:46 PM To: 070@... Subject: Re: [070] 80/160m Antenna
Byron:
There are some laws of physics/antennas you just can't ignore. An antenna that is a 1/2 wave length or longer will be more efficient than anything shorter. Sure you can use loading coil and such to make antenna appear electrically longer, but you still have an inefficient antenna... everything in electronics seems to be a trade off; you have to sacrifice one thing to get another. Just like in engineering you can build something better, but it may not be as good as what you had in the first place, but I don't know much about thatld. Did some tower work years ago and the crew tended to "over-engineer" things to err on safety side.
Anyhow, years ago a friend and I loaded up a 300 ft. AM broadcast tower on 160 in winter for some contest. Results were awful ... lots of noise and not many signals. Verticals tend to be noisy. Guess that's why some DXers on 160 use beverage antennas for receiving. Used to have a serious 160m station a few miles away which had 9 phased 110 ft verticals with a little tuning shack in middle. It belonged to K9DX and was operated remotely from his house 30 miles away; had a couple tours and it was awesome. All the hardware and antennas were expensive as well as the 80 acres of land it sat on. It gone now (sigh).
That was the ultimate DXers station and far out of most hams budget.
On the "poor hams" budget, some do quite well with limited antennas on 160m. Would suggest that you search for "160 meter antennas " on the web and find something that will work for you. A word of caution, ignore some of the claims made as every QTH is somewhat different with soil characteristics (soil conductivity, etc.) , height above average terrain, sources of interference, and so forth. Seems like some of the better 160m DXers live in areas where it's marshy near lakes, rivers and oceans... guess you could always flood your yard ?
Good luck !
Jerry n9avy
From: "Bryon nnegrom@... [070]" <070@...>
I'll see if I can get a mark up of my plot from Google Maps or something, but let me see if I can explain it a little.
I have lots of land around me. Though it isn't mine. I sit on about .65 acres of usable space. I have no major trees (anything taller than the gutter in the front yard). My antenna sits on the back corner of my house. It is a crank up tower about 40' (aluminum) with a K4KIO Hexbeam on it. Works really well...I think, this is my first setup. But, I can do a lot on 20 and 40 (even though it isn't necessarily intended for 40m). I have a tuner in my K3.
Out back of my house there is a large tree. I could probably get something up in there and connected to the tower. When the tower is lowered it sits about 14' (not including the antenna).
I have hesitated doing anything with this, because I do not want that in my line of sight out the back yard, at least not when it is going to be down and drooping.
I know to be efficient longer really is better. But, I just haven't found a great antenna that seems appealing and easy to put up without a lot of headache and trying to make things work when I have no idea what I'm doing with antennas. I'm a mechanical engineer with focus on medical devices, and antennas are still black magic to me!
What are your thoughts based on these comments?
|
|
|
|
Re: 80/160m Antenna
Byron: There are some laws of physics/antennas you just can't ignore. An antenna that is a 1/2 wave length or longer will be more efficient than anything shorter. Sure you can use loading coil and such to make antenna appear electrically longer, but you still have an inefficient antenna... everything in electronics seems to be a trade off; you have to sacrifice one thing to get another. Just like in engineering you can build something better, but it may not be as good as what you had in the first place, but I don't know much about thatld. Did some tower work years ago and the crew tended to "over-engineer" things to err on safety side. Anyhow, years ago a friend and I loaded up a 300 ft. AM broadcast tower on 160 in winter for some contest. Results were awful ... lots of noise and not many signals. Verticals tend to be noisy. Guess that's why some DXers on 160 use beverage antennas for receiving. Used to have a serious 160m station a few miles away which had 9 phased 110 ft verticals with a little tuning shack in middle. It belonged to K9DX and was operated remotely from his house 30 miles away; had a couple tours and it was awesome. All the hardware and antennas were expensive as well as the 80 acres of land it sat on. It gone now (sigh). That was the ultimate DXers station and far out of most hams budget. On the "poor hams" budget, some do quite well with limited antennas on 160m. Would suggest that you search for "160 meter antennas " on the web and find something that will work for you. A word of caution, ignore some of the claims made as every QTH is somewhat different with soil characteristics (soil conductivity, etc.) , height above average terrain, sources of interference, and so forth. Seems like some of the better 160m DXers live in areas where it's marshy near lakes, rivers and oceans... guess you could always flood your yard ? Good luck ! Jerry n9avy
From: "Bryon nnegrom@... [070]" <070@...> To: "070@..." <070@...> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 3:29 PM Subject: RE: [070] 80/160m Antenna I'll see if I can get a mark up of my plot from Google Maps or something, but let me see if I can explain it a little.
I have lots of land around me. Though it isn't mine. I sit on about .65 acres of usable space. I have no major trees (anything taller than the gutter in the front yard). My antenna sits on the back corner of my house. It is a crank up tower about 40' (aluminum) with a K4KIO Hexbeam on it. Works really well...I think, this is my first setup. But, I can do a lot on 20 and 40 (even though it isn't necessarily intended for 40m). I have a tuner in my K3. Out back of my house there is a large tree. I could probably get something up in there and connected to the tower. When the tower is lowered it sits about 14' (not including the antenna). I have hesitated doing anything with this, because I do not want that in my line of sight out the back yard, at least not when it is going to be down and drooping. I know to be efficient longer really is better. But, I just haven't found a great antenna that seems appealing and easy to put up without a lot of headache and trying to make things work when I have no idea what I'm doing with antennas. I'm a mechanical engineer with focus on medical devices, and antennas are still black magic to me! What are your thoughts based on these comments? Bryon, W7RIV
|
|
|
|
Re: WWWWIIIIDDDDDEEEE Signal
Roger Bryon-
Sorry for telling you what you already knew! Once set, the K3 setup just stays rock solid. The only control I fool with is the power knob when going from QRP to about 35w. I also have to play with the power when I go to the WSJT-X modes (don't need 35w!) but I don't have to fiddle with the sound card or computer settings. You probably read about my Rub Goldberg 160m antenna adventures in earlier posts just before the Great Pumpkin Sprint. It is such an outstanding antenna (only slightly better than a plastic coat hanger stuffed in the back of the rig) I won't repeat it here. But I will be most interested to see all the suggestions you get and to hear what you do. Hope I can go to school on your approach! 73, Rick - N7WE 070 - #1602
|
|
|
|
CERTS
boat.anchor@...
Overstuffed envelope arrived today. Thank you Maatthew and all the other volunteers. Barry VB7150
|
|
|
|
Re: 80/160m Antenna
W7RIV
I'll see if I can get a mark up of my plot from Google Maps or something, but let me see if I can explain it a little. I have lots of land around me. Though it isn't mine. I sit on about .65 acres of usable space. I have no major trees (anything taller than the gutter in the front yard). My antenna sits on the back corner of my house. It is a crank up tower about 40' (aluminum) with a K4KIO Hexbeam on it. Works really well...I think, this is my first setup. But, I can do a lot on 20 and 40 (even though it isn't necessarily intended for 40m). I have a tuner in my K3. Out back of my house there is a large tree. I could probably get something up in there and connected to the tower. When the tower is lowered it sits about 14' (not including the antenna). I have hesitated doing anything with this, because I do not want that in my line of sight out the back yard, at least not when it is going to be down and drooping. I know to be efficient longer really is better. But, I just haven't found a great antenna that seems appealing and easy to put up without a lot of headache and trying to make things work when I have no idea what I'm doing with antennas. I'm a mechanical engineer with focus on medical devices, and antennas are still black magic to me! What are your thoughts based on these comments? Bryon, W7RIV
|
|
|
|
Re: WWWWIIIIDDDDDEEEE Signal
W7RIV
I've read that from Don and everything I have ever done with my settings I always get just that, 4 bars solid, 5th bar flickering. Nothing more, nothing less. Seems like I should be able to get some variable actions when messing with things. Not know what to mess with, I haven't and I've just left it. This thread was a good time to bring it up and to check with the experts! Bryon, W7RIV
|
|
|
|
Re: 80/160m Antenna
Invert L is easy
======================== de N2MLP Brian Monroe County PA
========================
From: 070@... [mailto:070@...]
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 12:47 PM To: 070@... Subject: [070] 80/160m Antenna
I'm looking for a simple, and reasonable antenna for 80/160m.
What are your thoughts? I know some of you have some pretty elaborate setups. I'm looking for something easy.
Thanks, Bryon, W7RIV
|
|
|
|
Re: WWWWIIIIDDDDDEEEE Signal
Radio <radio@...>
Byron,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Distortion anywhere in the signal chain can cause a wide signal. That means the distortion can occur when strong, clean signal is received by a less then good receiver. …and a strong signal can be caused by a good antenna and good propagation — not just high power. Nobody ever said turn down your antenna. ;-) Another country heard from, 73 de Eric, KG6MZS
|
|
|
