Very good, Well, sounds like you have it installed fairly well, and though a
bunch of radials may help a bit, it really appears as though you have it
under control already. For me, the butternut was always the best vertical I
had but that cushcraft r5 was a close second and easier to get up and
running.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Gammon" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, November 30, 2013 1:53 PM
Subject: A little more description about the vertical set up here.
> Hi David, a few more details about the set up here, I think it's
> a model r5. I have a 5/8 inch 8 foot ground rod pounded in at
> the bottom of the antenna which is like I indicated, mounted on a
> 10 foot pole which is pounded into the ground itself
> with the top couple of feet that are in the ground surrounded
> with concrete. Clamped to that pole is another ten foot pole a
> little smaller OD that the antenna fits over. The soil is hard
> clay and we are about 1 mile south of the straights that run from
> the confluence of the San Juaquine and Sacramento rivers to the
> SF Bay. 73, Jim WA6EKS ----- Original Message -----
> From: David Hillebrandt <[log in to unmask]
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date sent: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 13:39:03 -0500
> Subject: Re: Observations about a cushcraft vertical antenna
>
> Hi Jim, I have a feeling your vertical is either the r5 or r7000,
> though
> they make a lot of them. Here in Florida, I have used verticals
> many times
> with very little ground radial system and still had good luck,
> though some
> places really require radials to do much of anything. I believe
> the r5 and
> r7 have a couple radials already attached to the antenna which
> helps for
> portable use and really don't have to do anything but hook a
> radio to it and
> start transmitting. Often, the better grounding, the quieter it
> is. I find
> that my g5rv worked better than the gap challenger vertical on 40
> and 80
> meters but of course all depends on where the person is on the
> other end.
> The vertical is a much better dx antenna than a g5rv usually. am
> glad yours
> is working for you. Hope hear you on the bands. 73 Dave w4ci
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Gammon" <[log in to unmask]
> To: <[log in to unmask]
> Sent: Saturday, November 30, 2013 1:28 PM
> Subject: Observations about a cushcraft vertical antenna
>
>
> Just some preliminary unscientific observations. I have been
> using a Cushcraft vertical on 20 through 10 meters for a couple
> of months now. Sorry, I don't remember the model number. It is
> mounted on a ten foot steel post behind our garage and has its
> own ground rod, but only small radials on the antenna itself.
> The bottom of the antenna is just a couple feet above the garage
> roof. The antenna has a match box at the feed point where the
> coax connects at the bottom. Sorry I can't remember the model,
> a
> ham friend gave me this used antenna. Anyway, my point is that
> it's my first use of a vertical on HF and is not as noisy as I
> expected it would be. I also have a DXCC dipole that works on
> the same bands and I can switch from one to the other antenna
> for
> noise and signal comparison. I can't really tell much
> difference
> between the two antennas so far. 73, Jim WA6EKS
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: John Miller <[log in to unmask]
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date sent: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 07:00:39 -0500
> Subject: Re: Question about antennas
>
> I have the 5BTV ground mounted and honestly I don't really see
> it
> being as
> noisy as I expected hearing my whole time as a ham how noisy
> verticals are.
> Height might make a difference but with being in a trailer park
> and all
> buildings being the same height, I'd have to guide it like crazy
> if I went
> above the roof. I did think about it. I have it guided now
> with
> very light
> rope tied to the house and shed but still half of it is above
> the
> roof line
> of all buildings in this area for miles so when we get wind, it
> sure gets
> the worst of it. I did it to be safe.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dave Basden" <[log in to unmask]
> To: <[log in to unmask]
> Sent: Saturday, November 30, 2013 12:10 AM
> Subject: Re: Question about antennas
>
>
> I used the 4BTV with four radials on each band on my rooftop and
> it
> worked extremely well. It was noisy like all verticals, but DX
> was
> readily available.
>
> 73,
>
> Dave, W7OQ
>
> At 09:25 AM 11/29/2013, you wrote:
> I have the Alpha Delta DX-EE, and it's a good dipole. I've had
> good luck
> with it for the past few years, even though I have it in my
> attic. I
> haven't used one that's exposed to the elements though, so I
> can't tell
> you
> how it holds up under adverse weather.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dr. Ronald E. Milliman
> Sent: Friday, November 29, 2013 11:15 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Question about antennas
>
> Is there anyone here on our list personally familiar with either
> of these
> antennas, and if so, what feedback can you give me about them?
>
> 1. The Alpha Delta DX-EE
>
> Description: Alpha Delta "ISO-RES" inductors replace lossy traps
> and
> capacitors, rated for Full Power; Direct 50 ohm feed, no antenna
> tuner is
> required except for extended frequency coverage; Fully assembled
> with
> insulated #12 copper wire, stainless hardware and 50 ft. of
> nylon rope;
> Includes the DELTA-C static protected center insulator and
> DELTA-CIN end
> insulators; Installs horizontally OR as an inverted V; covers:
> 40-20-15-10M
> plus 30-17-12M using a Wide Range Tuner, 40' Multi-band Antenna.
>
>
> 2. Hustler 4BTV -- 4 Band Trap Vertical
>
> Description: 4 Band Vertical HF Fixed Station covering 10, 15,
> 20, and 40
> Meters; 21'.
>
> Ron, K8HSY
|
