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:
richard fiorello <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
For blind ham radio operators <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 28 Nov 2011 21:37:55 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (67 lines)
Hi;
How tall is this thing and did you ground mount or roof mount it?  What is its power rating?
Thanks
Richard


----- Original Message -----
From: Curtis Delzer <[log in to unmask]>
To:  [log in to unmask]
Date: Saturday, Nov 26, 2011 09:10:54 PM
Subject: Re: Thinking of an HF vertical

>
>
> another terrific vertical for 40 to 6 meters is the Hygain 640/AV 
> which I have here and it truly works great. No radials!
> 
> 
> 
> At 12:15 PM 11/21/2011, you wrote:
> >Michael,
> >
> >Although I haven't had any experience with either of the antennas you
> >mentioned, I did at one time have a Butternut 18AVQ, which was supposed to
> >work on all bands from 80 through 10.  In fairness to the antenna, I wasn't
> >able to put down the kind of radial system stipulated in the manual, so the
> >antenna probably didn't live up to anything like its full potential.  That
> >said, though, it worked very well on 20, and I found that I could use that
> >band late at night, when it probably would otherwise have been closed.  On
> >other bands, though, the antenna was a very poor performer, with the worst
> >case being 80 meters where it didn't work at all.
> >
> >In my opinion, the important thing to consider with a vertical is whether or
> >not you want to deal with radials, and whether you want to have traps, which
> >will make the bandwidth very narrow.  In general, verticals seem to work
> >better at higher frequencies, and in my experience, dipoles and other wire
> >antennas perform better on the lower bands, with the possible exception of
> >160 where many people like to use quarter-wave verticals.
> >
> >Again, I am quite sure I would have done better with a good radial system,
> >but that's an important factor with most verticals.
> >
> >Steve
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Michael Ryan" <[log in to unmask]>
> >To: <[log in to unmask]>
> >Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 12:00
> >Subject: Thinking of an HF vertical
> >
> >
> > > Hi all:
> > >
> > > I'm thinking of adding an HF vertical again.
> > > My G5RV hasn't exactly out performed my old windom, about equal except on
> > > 40, slight edge to the rv.
> > > It's in an inverted V, apex at 50 feet.
> > > So I'm looking at 2 verticals, the Hustler 5BTV and the Butternut HF 6V.
> > > Anyone familiar with these antennas? Will they outperform my RV in its
> > > present configuration?
> > >
> > > TNX & 73
> > > Michael De VO1RYN
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPhone
> > >

ATOM RSS1 RSS2