Tom,

Here's some more fuel for the fire:  Since your 80 meter dipole is going to 
be pretty much non directional at that low height,put your DXCC in a 
direction that  will give you the best advantage on the higher bands 
depending on  what areas you want to favor with your rock crusher signal. 
The second antenna could then be for other bands not covered by your current 
antenna.  Maybe something for 160, and/or something to give you resonant 
antennas on the WARC bands.

Yesterday's suggestion to  get as much wire up in the air as will fit your 
spot and feed with open wire is  always a good and inexpensive option and 
may be worth considering for the second dipole.   It could give you all band 
operation and (I would guess)  less chance of interaction or detuning by 
having 2 antennas for the same bands in so close proximity.

73, Steve KW3A


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "tom behler" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 9:27 AM
Subject: Re: supports for wire antennas


> 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