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:
Butch Bussen <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
For blind ham radio operators <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 30 Sep 2015 12:33:13 -0700
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (88 lines)
Any way to send this without the equals?
73
Butch
WA0VJR
Node 3148
Wallace, ks.


On Wed, 30 Sep 2015, Eric Oyen 
wrote:

> here is an alternative that is pretty easy to build.
>
> 1 you will need 50 feet of PVC pipe and at least 1/4 wave of enameled =
> magnet wire. the idea here is to make a helical wound antenna (much like =
> a firestik. the windings will need to be widely spaced at the bottom =
> (about 1 turn per foot and gradually reducing to a tight wound coil near =
> the top. You can also create loaded ground radials this way. The ground =
> radials definitely need to be 1/4 wave long (electrically). the vertical =
> element can be 1/4 up to 3/4 waves (wound). THis will make an excellent =
> low space vertical antenna.
>
> as a second (receive only) you can create a magnetic loop antenna that =
> is not much larger than 10 feet in diameter. the top will be split and a =
> tuning cap placed there. there is also a secondary coupling loop (this =
> will directly connect to the coax). with the addition of a preamp, you =
> will have a station that can produce a decent signal on 160 with the =
> ears to match.
>
> DE n7zzt Eric
>
> On Sep 30, 2015, at 10:16 AM, Steve Forst wrote:
>
>> Mike,
>> =20
>> I don't have any experience with any of the antennas you mention, but=20=
>
>> perhaps an inverted L would be better than the long wire.  For long =
> haul=20
>> stuff on 160, vertical antennas are the way to go.   You would get =
> that=20
>> from the inverted L, or the other 2 antennas you mention.
>> =20
>> I'm using what is probably the worst antenna for 160, a loaded dipole=20=
>
>> that isn't very high.  You have a better location than me, and would=20=
>
>> probably do well no matter what antenna you use.
>> =20
>> While there is plenty of SSB activity, and even DX, my experience is=20=
>
>> that CW is the better mode on this band.  I have 19 DXCC countries on=20=
>
>> 160 SSB worked, and 60 countries on CW.   Only country I worked on =
> phone=20
>> that I couldn't repeat on CW was Gambia.
>> =20
>> Of course, your location may give you nice  SSB contacts into western=20=
>
>> Europe, that I could only dream about.
>> =20
>> Good luck.  Now is the time to do something before the snow flies.
>> =20
>> Do you know what the bandwidth would be for  the Zero 5 antenna with =
> the=20
>> optional coil?
>> =20
>> 73, Steve KW3A
>> =20
>> On 9/30/2015 11:35 AM, Michael Ryan wrote:
>>> Hi all:
>>> =20
>>> This may open up a flood gate but what are your decent 160M antennas =
> and experiences with these?
>>> I'm hoping to put up a 330 foot long wire on a 20 foot high mast in a =
> few weeks but not sure how well it will get out with 4 or 500W. I think =
> another favorite is the Hy-gain high towers, which are 50 feet tall with =
> a coil and require radials. There's now a coil I can buy for my Zero =
> Five vertical which makes it a better performer on 160 with radials. I'm =
> pretty sure I could get this coil and some radials for 160 for a 3RD the =
> cost of the Hy-gain high tower.
>>> =20
>>> 73:
>>> Mike DE VO1AX
>>> =20
>
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2