BLIND-HAMS Archives

For blind ham radio operators

BLIND-HAMS@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
tom behler <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
For blind ham radio operators <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 19 Jul 2010 07:27:00 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (37 lines)
Butch:

That's a fair question.

My thinking is that, especially when you get higher up in frequency, 
directionality becomes more possible if you can have dipoles that are 
arranged perpendicular to each other.

I have heard of field day set-ups that operate on that basis.

I guess my thinking is that if I can't have a tower and beam again, I should 
do whatever I can to maximize my potential for directionality where 
possible.

Don't know how sound the theory is, but it seems at least worth a try.

If others disagree or question these assumptions, please let me know. 
That's what this list is all about.

73 from Tom Behler:  KB8TYJ

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Butch Bussen" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2010 10:04 PM
Subject: Re: supports for wire antennas


I'm curious why you want two dipoles.  It has been a long time since I
studied antenna theory, but on 80 meters, for example, isn't there only
about 3 db difference between broad side versis off the ends?
73
Butch Bussen
wa0vjr
open Node 3148
Las Vegas

ATOM RSS1 RSS2